CANADA

VOLUME 135 S NUMBER 142 S 1st SESSION S 36th PARLIAMENT

OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD)

Monday, October 26, 1998

Speaker: The Honourable Gilbert Parent CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.)

All parliamentary publications are available on the ``Parliamentary Internet Parlementaire'' at the following address: http://www.parl.gc.ca 9363

HOUSE OF COMMONS

Monday, October 26, 1998

The House met at 11 a.m. Humphreys, who was instrumental in writing the special human rights declaration for the United Nations. I am sure New Bruns- ______wickers are proud that the stamp was issued. We are certainly proud that a New Brunswicker received international recognition Prayers for his work on human rights.

______In Canada, of course, we have our own human rights legislation. However I question the necessity for a fishers’ bill of rights PRIVATE MEMBERS’ BUSINESS because across this country there are many different sectors of the economy. If this House is going to try to develop bills of rights, maybe there should be one farmers. They probably deserve a bill of D (1105 ) rights because one of the first occupations on this earth was [English] agriculture. Maybe some of our friends from that sector could have a farmers’ bill of rights. We could go on and on to identify different FISHERS’ BILL OF RIGHTS groups that should certainly have rights. I think of animal rights. Maybe the member opposite should be thinking of a fish bill of The House resumed from June 4 consideration of the motion that rights. Bill C-302, an act to establish the rights of fishers including the right to be involved in the process of fisheries stock assessment, In the last 25 years fish have had a very difficult time on our fish conservation, setting of fishing quotas, fishing licensing and globe. As a very good source of protein, we find that many the public right to fish and establish the right of fishers to be emerging nations or nations in difficulty have looked upon the informed of decisions affecting fishing as a livelihood in advance waters of this earth as supplying protein for their people. As a and the right to compensation if other rights are abrogated unfairly, result, the fishing industry, and fish in particular, have been under be read the second time and referred to a committee. great stress. In the 1980s Atlantic Canada suffered great difficulties Mr. Charles Hubbard (Miramichi, Lib.): Madam Speaker, it with the decline of the groundfishery. certainly is a privilege today to join with my colleagues in the House to debate the motion of my colleague, the hon. member for My colleague from the west coast might worry about coho New Brunswick Southwest, who represents a riding that is very salmon. They too might need to have their rights protected. If we much involved with the fishery. do not have some protection for these species soon our entire economy in terms of the fishery will be in difficulty. Only about a week ago our provincial newspaper had a very lengthy article on the tremendous resource that we have in the Bay I have certain concerns with the bill in terms of this group of of Fundy. I am sure that the member, who is from that area, is very people. I know that fisher people are a very important part of our much concerned about the future and the longevity of the fishery economy. As a government we have attempted to regulate and to for all of us in Atlantic Canada. show fisher people that they have a responsibility to sustain their industry. It is curious today that we are talking about a so-called fishers’ bill of rights. If we go back, historically, we find that in the last 200 Through regulation and hopefully co-operation the various fisher years rights have been developed for a very significant group of people can work along with the Department of Fisheries and people. Oceans to ensure that our fishery has a future. I think of the original bill of rights and the work that was done by The House should also recognize that with the decline of the east the American colonists when the United States was set up as a new coast fishery and the problems on the west coast we have devel- country in this hemisphere. Then, of course, with the French oped programs to assist those areas. The fisher people who have revolution we had the declaration of the rights of man. difficulties will have an opportunity to take part in programs to get Also this week we have to reflect upon the stamp that came out assistance with training and to improve habitat, as we have done on only this past month recognizing a fellow New Brunswicker, John the west coast with the salmon fishery. 9364 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Private Members’ Business

D (1110 ) all across the country and on all coasts. However I will be talking about this bill from a west coast perspective, as the member On the east coast, as the member opposite from Halifax would opposite said that we might have concerns in this area. certainly agree, we have developed good programs to make sure that people in the fishing industry can receive some assistance The bill describes a bill of rights for fishermen. This bill has when fish become scarce. multiple rationales and essentially would be a good counter-bal- ance to the dominance of decision making on fisheries fronts by an If we look at the fishery in the great province of Newfoundland overly centralized bureaucracy that we all know as the Department we find that today the resource from the sea is bringing more of Fisheries and Oceans. This bill is not responsive enough to local money to that province than it did during the best years of the communities, to local fishermen or in fact to the recreational groundfishery. sector.

We are looking at alternate species. The fishermen may develop This bill is clear in stating that people who fish for their other aspects of fishing and sales for those fish, which will enable livelihood should be involved in decisions regarding the protection, them to continue in their home communities. However, we have to development and harvesting of fish. This is good for two reasons. be concerned with what has happened to the good people on the First, the fishermen have important local knowledge of the kind we east coast and those who have encountered serious difficulties as a cannot afford to prove scientifically, but which has stood the test of result of the economy. time. Second, if we do not involve the fishermen we do not get a buy-in with new policy directions and new management proposals. We have to remember that fish have traditionally been very available. However, today we have to be concerned with the fact D (1115) that we have to sustain the fishery. It is also a primary way to develop volunteerism which is so I would suggest that the member is a bit off base in terms of critical in the development of fish stocks, whether through fish trying to develop a charter of rights for fisher people. The minister hatcheries, the development of riparian zones or developing a has brought forward a committee to look at partnerships in fishing, conservation ethic in children’s or citizen’s watch on poaching. to try to develop a co-operative venture between those who are out Any number of things contribute to the good citizen aspect of on the water and those sitting in offices trying to regulate the looking after our resources. fishery.

We have to remember that fish are a public, not a private Probably the most controversial aspect of the bill deals with the resource, and the Government of Canada has a definite responsibil- right of compensation to those whose rights were taken away or ity to see it continue as a satisfactory industry. abrogated by the federal government through unilateral or actions which exclude affected fishermen. In my riding of Miramichi the first minister of marine and fisheries in the original Government of Canada in 1867 was Peter The government and DFO bureaucracy will fight this clause Mitchell. We have watched over the years what has happened with tooth and nail because it attempts to make them accountable for the fishery since the time of Peter Mitchell. We have to be decisions they make about people affected by their decisions. It is concerned with what our responsibilities are. far easier for bureaucrats or ministers to sit ensconced, buffered and unchallenged and be securely protected from the results of I know the member who brought forward this bill is concerned their decisions. These people do not have repercussions from their with his own area. He is very much involved with the area of bad policy decisions. Given a choice they would prefer not to deal southern New Brunswick. He needs to see that DFO and the fisher with people affected by their decisions because plainly it is people work co-operatively to continue the fishery there. But I uncomfortable for them. think we have to be more concerned as members of this govern- ment and people, in general, about our responsibilities to the This is the crux of the bill, the strongest part of the bill. It is an fishery so that it can continue. attempt to bring accountability to the bureaucracy.

As chairman of the fisheries committee I would not support a bill Despite all this I have some concerns about the bill which I for a particular charter of rights for one particular group. I would be discussed with the member for Vancouver Island North who spoke more concerned with supporting the concept that we have responsi- to the bill in debate on June 4 this year. Here are our concerns. bilities as a government to see that the fishery works well, that it works co-operatively and that it works in the best interests of all The bill does not establish a process to provide for fishermen’s Canadians. involvement or representation prior to the decision making pro- cess. There is nothing to say that the fishermen’s representations Mr. Bill Gilmour (Nanaimo—Alberni, Ref.): Madam Speaker, have to be heeded. Nor does it give any meaningful decision when we speak to a bill such as Bill C-302, proposed by the making power to those affected. There is a prohibition against any member for New Brunswick Southwest, there are commonalties decisions being made until all the hearings are exhausted. This October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9365

Private Members’ Business could render the system too cumbersome when quick decisions are D (1120 ) needed for conservation or other purposes. In conclusion, I support the intent of the bill to create a In addition, clause 5(a) of the bill mentions fishing rights but this fishermen’s bill of rights and hope we can give qualified support so term is not defined. Licence holders who are active and who that the bill can move forward to committee where we can address continue to invest in vessels, gear and so on, should have a right to some of our concerns. There are very good areas within the bill but renewal of that licence year after year. However this is not set out there are also areas of concern. in the bill. It would also be useful to see that the minister could not create new licences without consultation and support from all existing licence holders of all categories affected. I give it qualified support and look forward to it going to a vote in the House and then on to committee.

Also the definition of the public right to fish in clause 2 is not consistent with the general law that extends this right to the Mr. Gordon Earle (Halifax West, NDP): Madam Speaker, I am commercial sector. This misdefining of the public right to fish pleased to rise today in the House to support Bill C-302. could be taken as an abolition by parliament of the public right to fish in any area beyond the areas defined specifically in the bill. People who make their living from the sea have always been central to the culture, economy and social life of the maritimes and On the west coast the public right to fish, the common law right certainly of my riding of Halifax West. For the many people who that dates back to the Magna Carta, is a public right of access that work to sustain themselves, their families and communities today, in the commercial and recreation sector is tempered by limited dating back to the very first aboriginal inhabitants of our region, entry licences and other restrictions, but this public right is still the fishing has been a way of life in the deepest sense of the word. overriding check on the predominant powers of the minister. For untold generations people have challenged themselves and Removal of this public right would essentially give the minister the elements to sustain their livelihood and that of their families the power to allocate fisheries quotas to anyone, any group, from the wealth of resources beneath the waves. From their own institution or person. This is the crux of the debate over the ethnic successes and mistakes people have learned about fishing. They based aboriginal fisheries strategy, a pilot sales program which the have become knowledgeable about tides, seasonal variations, fish federal government implemented in 1992. stocks, the winds, equipment, and all that is necessary to learn and develop the profession of fishing. Fishers have been taught by their parents and by their communities as a whole. They have also British Columbians oppose a separate commercial fishery based learned from other communities and increasingly from fishers in on race. Ongoing polarization and division have been created by other countries. There have been times when even government natives and non-natives on the issue every since. efforts and research have proven useful.

In 1998 the public protest against this fishery included native The people of Halifax West who make or hope once again to commercial fishermen in the all Canadian commercial fishery who make their living from the sea face a growing danger. This danger also opposed the separate fishery but are now fully prepared to go has caused thousands of people to lose their livelihood and equal public with their concerns. All legal challenges to this fishery have numbers of families to lose any security for their children’s future. succeeded. Yet the government and the minister persist in pursuing This peril is responsible for the unbelievable event of entire fish this policy. stocks being wiped out. This danger is the federal government’s mishandling of fisheries issues. The legal rights protest has gone on since 1992 which has detracted from focused management of the fisheries. It has focused I support the right of fishers to be involved in every aspect of people’s energies on divisive issues instead of allowing them to decision making and the implementation of those decisions that look at the big picture and conservation issues. affect their livelihood. Who else has the knowledge to craft the best answers about fish stock assessments, fish conservation, the setting of fish quotas and fishing licences? Certainly not the Department of Another concern is that clauses 4 and 5 of the bill extend into Fisheries and Oceans bureaucrats living in Ottawa. areas covered by provincial legislation. These clauses are probably unconstitutional. If something is validly authorized by provincial legislation it is beyond the reach of federal legislation. Given the It boggles the mind that the Liberal government has chosen not exclusive nature of the division of powers under our Constitution, I to involve those who make their day to day living in the fishing feel it should be left that way and these clauses should not be left in industry as part and parcel of the decisions that in turn will directly the bill. affect and often threaten their livelihood. 9366 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Private Members’ Business The decisions made by the roughly 800 DFO bureaucrats in Bill C-302 which sets out to ensure fishers are central to Ottawa are based on what knowledge? Is it by studying and decisions affecting the fisheries is nothing more than plain sense. analysing the movement of fish in the Rideau River in Ottawa or Everybody would win. The bill should certainly be sent to the by consulting the occasional ice fisher on the Ottawa River? It Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans for study, improve- is certainly not by working on a day to day basis with those in ment and support. the industry, armed with the experience and skills to assist the government in making decisions. One example of the government’s fisheries minister hiding his head in the sand is the current serious dispute in the lobster We can be sure that the government consults very closely with fisheries in southwestern Nova Scotia. This dispute involves top executives of big banks about decisions that might affect their commercial, aboriginal and non-aboriginal lobster fishers. Did the billions of dollars or with top multinational corporate executives government play a leadership role with the long term security of about decisions the government might implement that would affect this fish stock and the livelihoods of these people at the forefront? their operations. However the government treats fishers as the No. Once again it has hidden its head in the sand and refused to sit uneducated and insignificant. It is a crime. The cost of that crime is down and talk with those in the industry about the best and most a mismanaged government department making bad and often reasonable long term solution for all involved. absurd decisions. It hurts people who make their livelihood from fishing in St. Margaret’s Bay and throughout my riding. It seems everybody but the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans and the Ottawa top bureaucrats is able to reach an agreement on the A case in point is the announcement early this year that fish threat posed to this industry by the government’s refusal to quotas for Nova Scotia would be 5 fish per person or 25 fish per centrally involve fishers in every step of decision making and boat for non-commercial fishers. We could hear the laughter of implementation. The Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans fishers in response to this in my riding all the way from Herring was able to produce two reports unanimously agreed to by five Cove to Black Point. Just who would those supposedly enforcing different federal parties. this regulation charge if there were a number of people in a boat and too many fish? Would it be the one in the boat closest to the shore or the tallest one? Who? This decision is absurd and How did the government respond? It was by yanking the member unenforceable because the decision was made in Ottawa without for Gander—Grand Falls out of the committee chair spot. This the proper input of those who do the fishing. committee did its best to base its efforts on what it has learned from people in the industry, and that is what may have upset the government. The government’s mishandling of TAGS and the post-TAGS program has condemned thousands to poverty and helplessness. There are over 40,000 fishers out of work. The government has It only makes sense for those who fish for their living and those spent over $3.4 billion in income support. in fisheries industries to participate in a meaningful way in federal government decision making. I fully support the bill and challenge every government member to support it. The people who make D (1125 ) their living or hope to make their living from the fisheries in my riding of Halifax West deserve no less. All those in similar positions across the country deserve no less. Ultimately decisions made by Ottawa bureaucrats about the livelihood of those living over 1,000 kilometres away pits people against people and community against community. Fishers should Mr. Bill Matthews (Burin—St. George’s, PC): Madam Speak- be consulted about the allocation of quotas as the bill recommends er, it is a pleasure to participate today in debate on Bill C-302, an and about proper gear and equipment. Fishers should be consulted act to establish the rights of fishers. about fish stocks. We all know fishers were warning about the cod stocks long before the government in its too little, too late fashion slammed the door shut on an entire industry. I listened with great interest to the hon. member who just concluded. How can anyone stand in his or her place and be against involving fishers or fishermen in stock assessment, fish conserva- The people in my riding who make their living from the sea are tion, the setting of fish quotas and fishing licences? How can not millionaires. The people who fish or want to fish in Sambro, anyone be against that consultation and involvement process? Ketch Harbour, Portuguese Cove and East and West Pennant cannot easily weather huge losses due to bad federal government deci- sions. However they have to, time and time again, simply because As well I listened with interest to the hon. member for Mirami- people who fish are not considered by the Liberal government to be chi when he talked about a fish bill of rights. I could not help but key players in decisions about the fishing industry. With the wonder, as the member made that suggestion, if he had consulted fisheries dying the last budget of the government did nothing for with the fish and what response he got back. I wonder if the fish are those in the industry. positive to his view that there should be a fish bill of rights. October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9367

Private Members’ Business I say that in a light manner because what we are talking about Mr. Bill Matthews: Yes, they swim around the globe. in Bill C-302 is involving those people directly in the harvesting of fish, in stock assessments, in licensing and in the setting of The other troublesome point is that fishermen for years warned quotas and so on. As my my hon. colleague who spoke before me the federal government of the impending disaster. On the west said, for years in Atlantic Canada people involved in the fishing coast of Canada, British Columbia, fish harvesters are warning the industry, the harvesters, warned the federal governments of the federal government of the same problems. The government is day that we were heading for a crisis in our groundfish stock, ignoring what is happening in British Columbia and the problems particularly our cod stocks. Year after year the federal government are increasing and getting bigger. ignored those people, and we all know the consequences now. I support the bill to include fish harvesters in conservation, in Hundreds of our rural communities are on the verge of extinc- licensing and in fish stock assessments. How can anyone argue tion. There is no employment in those communities because there against it? How can anyone be against those who are directly is no fish to harvest and consequently no fish to process. involved in the harvesting of fish resources having more involve- ment? Have the Department of Fisheries and Oceans listen to them and take into account what they are telling it, then weigh that in the D (1130 ) decision making process so that wiser decisions are made in the future than have been made in the past. God knows if there is one I commend my colleague for bringing forward this fishers bill of federal government department that has made unwise decisions rights. It is a step in the right direction. over the years, it has been the Department of Fisheries and Oceans.

I want to speak for a moment about the public right to fish. My I support the bill. I commend my colleague for bringing it hon. colleague who spoke just before me mentioned what we call forward. I commend those who have stood in their place today to the food fishery in Newfoundland and Labrador. He talked about support this piece of legislation. five fish a day and so many people in a boat. If we involve those people in a more meaningful fashion, it will In Newfoundland and Labrador for all of our lives we have been mean that we will make better decisions. We will have greater fish allowed to go out and catch a fish for supper. That has all changed resources for the future. We will not go through the crisis in in the last four or five years. We cannot get in our boats and go out Atlantic Canada and the west coast of Canada that we are going and fish any more. We have to wait for the Minister of Fisheries through today. and Oceans to inform us if he is going to allow us to catch a fish and then he sets the date. Over the last couple of years he has given People are unemployed. Out-migration is staggering. The sur- us one weekend to fish. He basically has given us three days to fish vival of rural Canada is seriously threatened today. When I go for our food fishery. through my riding of Burin—St. George’s it is difficult to find anyone left in those communities who is under 45 years of age. Nova Scotia, P.E.I, New Brunswick and parts of Quebec get a What future is there for people? This has been forced upon people 68-day food fishery. We get three days. It is something we were because there is no employment. allowed to do all of our lives, and now we can only fish if the minister allows us to fish and for a maximum of three days. That is The Government of Canada mismanaged our fish resources. It very difficult for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to accept. We has to take responsibility. All we are asking is that the Department are catching the same fish that the people in Nova Scotia, New of Fisheries and Oceans and the federal government involve the Brunswick and Quebec are catching. They are the same fish stocks. people who harvest those fish resources. Include their assessments They swim back and forth. These are the fish that Nova Scotians in decision making and make wiser decisions for the fish resources catch, and we catch and so on. Somehow the Minister of Fisheries so that people who depend on those resources will be better off in and Oceans and his parliamentary secretary, who I see shaking his the future. head in disapproval, do not understand that fish swim.

D (1135 ) Why should we not be allowed to fish for 68 days for a food fishery. If the parliamentary secretary can fish for 68 days in Prince Mr. Lou Sekora (Port Moody—Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, Edward Island, why can we not do it? It is the same fish. What he is Lib.): Madam Speaker, the bill before the House is impractical and allowing people in Nova Scotia to fish for 68 days is the same fish unnecessary and as such should not become law. It is unnecessary stock we can fish for three days. for many reasons.

If only some of them over there knew a little bit about fish, what One of the reasons is that the participatory role it seeks for a relief it would be. fishermen is already becoming a standard practice. Procedures and processes for ongoing consultations with stakeholders are in place An hon. member: They swim around the globe. as a matter of policy. 9368 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Private Members’ Business For instance, fishermen are already involved in stock assess- What exactly does this mean? Leaving aside the ambiguity of ‘‘the ment and conservation issues on the east coast through their effect that fishing on traditional lifestyles’’, how much consider- participation in the fisheries resources conservation council. Last ation would the bill require? Whose traditional lifestyle? How do month the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans announced the we distinguish traditional lifestyle versus a non-traditional one? formation of a similar council on the west coast, the Pacific The bill does not say. resource conservation council chaired by Hon. John Fraser. In addition co-management arrangements are in place in a number The bill is both unnecessary and unworkable. Worse still, it of fisheries that give fishermen an expanded role in the decision misses entirely what should be the focus of our attention: protect- making process. ing the ocean and its resources. The bill is also impractical because it would tie the minister’s hands and prevent him or her from making decisions to protect the D (1140 ) fisheries at a time when this protection is urgently required. It is not just Canada that has seen the consequences of overfish- For example, the bill would require that fishermen be repre- ing. Other nations from New Zealand to Norway have all seen fish sented on or be heard by a body involved in the process intended to stocks damaged by overfishing. We all now recognize that the produce a division or recommendation respecting fisheries stock survival of some of these stocks hangs by a thread and that if we do assessment, fish conservation, the setting of fishing quotas, fishing not take action now, it may be too late. That is why the focus of licensing or the public right to fish or, in the case of an order to be government policy must be and is on conserving and protecting the made by the governor in council, to have the opportunity to fish stocks. This bill would do nothing to advance those goals. comment on every proposed order before it is made.

The hon. member must know that the minister issues many such What we need are effective conservation based management orders in response to changing conditions in the fisheries. Some- policies, policies that balance the competing demands we make on times these orders must be made on an emergency basis. This the oceans with their ability to sustain their demands. This clause would institute a cumbersome and time consuming review government is putting those policies in place. It continues to work process that would delay the implementation of any decisions until through the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization, NAFO, to all appeals had been exhausted. It would bring fisheries manage- implement mechanisms to stop overfishing. ment in Canada to a standstill. Last month we saw the formal adoption of 100% observation The bill is impractical for another reason, its potential cost to the coverage for all fish vessels in the NAFO regulatory area. The taxpayers. The bill would require that every fisher who suffers a decision meets one of the most important conservation objectives loss as a result of the abrogation of fishing rights other than as a advanced by Canada at the NAFO annual meeting held in Lisbon in result of a process that would involve fishermen shall be entitled to September. NAFO has acknowledged the success of the pilot compensation for a loss. This could create a huge financial program for 100% observation coverage and has noted that the obligation for the government. Where does the hon. member think apparent infringements of its rules have declined by over 80% this money would come from? It is fine to be free with the since the pilot program was implemented. taxpayers’ money but we have spent five years sacrificing to bring the country’s deficit under control. Now is not the time to be incurring substantial obligations. The United Nations fisheries agreement, the result of a Canadian initiative, provides the means to strengthen international arrange- ments such as NAFO. Parties to this agreement will help to create a Consider the double bind that this would create for the minister new enforcement system for the high seas. This system will and his officials. Suppose they were faced with making a decision provide for the protection of straddling and migratory fish stocks to protect a specific stock but to do so would mean paying a huge on the high seas. It will provide a binding and compulsory sum of compensation. Is the intent of this bill to discourage the settlement for fishing disputes among states. minister from taking needed measures to protect the fisheries, or is the intent to load the taxpayers up with new financial burdens? Canada is in the process of developing an oceans strategy that The bill is not precise in its wording and focus, touching on will set the course for management of our ocean resources into the many legal issues, including some that are outside federal jurisdic- next century. This strategy has three principles: sustainable devel- tion and would be impossible to implement in any effective opment; integrating the management of human activity in estu- manner. The wording is so vague as to be open to multiple aries, coastal and marine waters; and the precautionary approach, a interpretations. commitment to err on the side of caution.

We can take our pick of phrases but let us take this one: the The strategy is based on the premise that everyone with a stake consideration of the effect of fishing on traditional lifestyles in the future health of the oceans must work together to preserve including but not restricted to aboriginal traditional lifestyles. and protect them. This is the thrust of the government policy with October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9369

Private Members’ Business regard to the oceans and their resources, and it is both appropriate recognized feature of our law since the reception of English law and effective. into what is now Canada.

Rather than focusing on creating rights for any particular group, It became codified in 1215 when it was set down in provision 47 we must concentrate on protecting the oceans and the conservation of the Magna Carta. It was designed to address a public grievance of their resources for all Canadians because without them, there caused by the practice of the king in those times to clear the public will be no fishermen and fishing communities, traditional or off the fishing grounds whenever he wished to go fishing. otherwise. Since 1215 it has been accepted in English law that the king does I urge the House to reject this bill. not own the fisheries in tidal waters. They are public. The king has no power to transfer such public fisheries to an exclusive group. All members of the public are equally entitled to access. Mr. John Cummins (Delta—South Richmond, Ref.): Madam Speaker, the fundamental protection for fishermen against arbitrary action by the government is found in the public right to fish. The Because the public right to fish has an ancient basis, it is fishers bill of rights introduced by my colleague from Charlotte sometimes asked by those not familiar with fisheries or marine law recognizes the importance to fishermen of this right. It is for this if it still has any basis in law in Canada. The courts and the law reason I stand today to offer my support for this bill of rights for officers of the crown have from the earliest days in Canada fishermen. recognized the public right to fish.

This ancient public right, a right for all citizens, until recently In 1996 the Supreme Court of Canada in deciding Van der Peet, was so ingrained in our law making that it was not often spoken of. Gladstone and NTC Smokehouse, fisheries cases from British As of late it has become fashionable for ministers of fisheries to Columbia, relied on the legal principle often referred to as the trumpet the importance of the creation of exclusive or private public right to fish. fisheries. Sometimes well meaning but weak ministers have been tempted by the idea that they could buy peace on the water and end This ancient right has stood the test of time and is very much lawlessness through the creation of private fisheries. This hap- alive today. It guarantees the public right of access in public pened in British Columbia in 1992 with the creation of the waters. Fish in navigable or tidal waters are not owned by the exclusive native commercial salmon fishery on the Fraser. crown. Rather, the crown is the guardian or trustee for the public in this right of access to a fishery in public waters. Another insidious trend is just as great a threat to the fishery as the attempt to buy peace through the creation of private fisheries. The supreme court’s 1996 decision in Gladstone relied on the That is the turning of a fishery over to a large corporation, to the position our courts and law officers have been taking for the past rich and the powerful. 150 years. The court in Gladstone relied on and restated the decision in the 1913 British Columbia fisheries reference:

In the rush to create these private fisheries, our policy makers Since the time of the Magna Carta, there has been a common law right to fish in have forgotten our history and our fisheries law in regard to the tidal waters that only can be abrogated by the enactment of competent legislation. public right to fish. The legal principles underpinning the public right were not arrived at overnight or in some great economic think The 1913 reference certainly established that the public right of tank. The public right is not the preserve of the right of economists access was a part of Canadian law, yet it operated in Canada long on the right or the left. The public right knows neither left nor right. before 1913.

D (1145 ) The National Archives contains an 1866 letter from the solicitor general of the province of Canada that is still quoted today. In the 1866 legal opinion the solicitor general states: It has stood the test of time. When we tinker with the public fishery we can do great harm unless we have understood what the Without an act of parliament—no exclusive right could thereby be gained—as the public right is and its proven utility over hundreds of years, that it crown could not—grant an exclusive privilege in favour of individuals over public has given all citizens access to the public fishery, rich or poor, large rights—in respect of which the crown only holds as trustee for the public. or small, native or non-native. That equality of access deserves careful tending in a fast changing world. The National Archives also has a handwritten letter to Sir John A. Macdonald from one of his ministers dated 1882 advising him Like so many of our legal and political conventions the public of the centrality in fisheries law of the public right to fish: right developed in English law, but from the earliest days of Fishing rights in public waters cannot be made exclusive excepting under the settlement found root in Canada. The public right to fish has been a express sanction of parliament. 9370 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Private Members’ Business Justice LaForest, a recently retired justice of the Supreme Court Last summer at a time when American Fisheries Society scien- of Canada, in his legal text ‘‘Water Law in Canada’’ describes the tists had named at least 214 coho stocks in B.C. at a high risk of federal government as a trustee for the public of the public right extinction, the department’s chief spokesman on fisheries manage- of fishing. ment told fishermen that of the 900 individual coho stocks in B.C., only two were threatened with extinction and that efforts would be The federal government in its argument in the supreme court in made to protect them. Gladstone neatly summarized the law: On June 19 the minister stated: ‘‘In order to meet my coho Since Canada was not settled by the English prior to the Magna Carta there could not be exclusive fishing grounds in tidal waters in those parts of Canada which are conservation objectives announced on May 21, all areas on the governed by the common law (unless granted by statute). coast will be defined as either red zones where there is an objective of zero fishing mortality or yellow zones where fishing will be ‘‘Fisheries Law’’, a document prepared by the Continuing Legal allowed if and when the risk of coho bycatch mortality is mini- Education Society of British Columbia as an aid for lawyers mal’’. seeking to upgrade their knowledge of fisheries law states: When it came to putting in practice the notion of protecting fish, [The public right to fish] places a restriction on the power of the crown, and therefore on the discretion of the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, which applies to the minister was nowhere to be seen. In fact, he allowed fishing in a this day—Without clear express statutory authority common law rights in the public red zone area around the Queen Charlotte Islands, an area where fisheries—cannot be extinguished. coho stocks were at high risk of extinction.

I have taken a great deal of time addressing the public right of John Disney, a respected fishermen from Masset in the Queen access to the fishery because it is fundamental to any bill of rights Charlotte Islands, tells me that in the last cycle year commercial for fisherman. gill net fishermen in that area killed only 1,038 coho as bycatch for the whole season. D (1150) The minister allowed sports fishermen, in particular his friend, Recent actions by the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans reveal the owner of the Oak Bay Marine Group, to conduct a sport fishery that he has played fast and loose with this ancient right in British in that area which Mr. Disney estimates was killing 900 coho per Columbia. day.

My views on the legality of the native commercial fishery A fishers bill of rights as proposed by my friend from Charlotte regulations are well known. would have prevented this arbitrary transfer of allocation designed to profit a rich friend of the minister and would have offered The provincial court of British Columbia ruled this year that protection to the resource. these regulations were outside the law. The court found the minister in contempt of the law but I am not here today to talk Mr. Paul Steckle (Huron—Bruce, Lib.): Madam Speaker, it is about the now illegal exclusive native commercial fisheries regula- a pleasure for me to address private member’s Bill C-302 by the tions. member for Charlotte. All Canadians and all members of this House want to see a If the minister and his officials had respect for the law and the healthy fishery into the coming century, one that provides a good ancient right of public access to the fishery, we would not be living to independent professional owner-operators and employees, confronted by an illegal act by the minister of fisheries. one that supports flourishing fishing communities along the na- tion’s coastlines that is sustainable and supports a flexible, versa- Fishermen must know their rights if they are to protect them- tile and self-reliant industry largely self-regulating and operating selves from those policy makers who would create private fisheries without subsidies. for the profit of the powerful, whether they be large corporations or those that engage in lawlessness. We may argue how to achieve it but few would disagree with this goal. How to best realize this goal is where we differ. Is it by The best advice, whether in 1866, 1882, 1913 or 1996 by law adopting the legislation before the House or by instituting a officers of the crown and the courts has been to remind ministers so-called fishers bill of rights? I do not believe so. This is not the that their job is to protect the public right. They are its trustee, its way to achieve this goal. guarantor. Passing this bill could actually be counterproductive, harming I support this bill of rights for fishermen because it acts to not only the resource but also the very communities the bill is remind the minister of his responsibility as trustee of the public intended to help. Let me explain why. right to fish in public waters. Let us first take a look at what the honourable member wants to I bring to the attention of the House another area of arbitrary achieve. In presenting the bill, he said it is an act to establish the action by the minister of fisheries where fishermen are in need of rights of fishermen, including the right to be involved in the protection. process of fisheries stock assessment, fish conservation, setting of October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9371

Private Members’ Business fishing quotas, fishing licensing and the public right to fish and But to tie the minister’s hands so that essential decisions cannot be establish the right of fishermen to be informed of decisions made when they must be made would be folly. affecting fishing as a livelihood in advance and the right to compensation if other rights are abrogated unfairly. The minister of fisheries is the member of cabinet responsible for fisheries. It is up to him or her to set policy to decide when to D (1155 ) fish, where to fish and what to fish. If the policy does not work the minister can decide to change it, usually after consulting with those The hon. member must know that fishermen already participate affected. in most if not all these activities and that in practice they are actively involved in stock assessment, fish conservation and But to mandate a legislated requirement to consult while the monitoring. Fishermen participate through consultation along with health of the stocks hangs in the balance fetters the minister’s other stakeholders in the development of integrated fishery man- ability to act quickly in the interest of conserving the resource. agement plans and the setting of fishery quotas. Many fishermen are already involved directly in managing fisheries through the co-management approach or joint project agreements with DFO. Surely the intention behind this bill is not to frustrate conserva- tion efforts, not now when some fish stocks require extremely DFO developed the co-management approach as a way to give careful management and not when we have already made progress the people who work in the fishery more say in how it is managed. in adopting responsible and co-operative management. An example of the co-management approach in the maritimes is the Cape Breton snow crab fishery where fishermen have entered into a The west coast groundfish trawl fishery now operates under an multiyear joint project agreement with DFO. innovative management regime. This regime includes individual quotas that establish individual accountability for the harvest Other examples of co-management include shrimp on the Sco- limits. Community representatives actively contribute to the man- tian shelf and exploratory fisheries in skate, monkfish, rock crab agement of the fishery through the groundfish development author- and red crab. ity which was established jointly by the federal and provincial governments in 1996. Co-management works well as a voluntary approach that in- creases the participation of fishermen in decision making. The Change is happening and not just in the case of groundfish. government is planning to introduce a new fishers act that would Management of the west coast herring fishery is also changing in allow individuals and communities more say over decisions affect- response to recommendations from the industry. Many shell fish ing their lives and the capacity to do longer term planning. fisheries are managed under co-operative agreements with fisher- men who are contributing to innovative monitoring and observer Fishermen and others in the industry have said repeatedly that programs. they want government out of the daily operations of the fisheries. The government has listened. As we all know, the west coast salmon fishery has also under- The bill before the House today is unnecessary. There are other gone major changes. Last June the government announced a major reasons for rejecting this bill, among which is it would be restructuring of the Pacific salmon fishery. It was a momentous impossible to put into practice. Let me give an example of why this decision and was taken only after extensive study and consultation approach is impractical. with fishermen and others in the industry.

The bill requires that decisions not be implemented until all This consultation is continuing. After the government an- appeals have been exhausted and reasonable notice has been given nounced conservation measures last May to protect and restore to the fishermen involved. In 1995 the west coast groundfish trawl coho salmon stocks, 23 community meetings took place throughout fishery exceeded its TACs for many species so the minister of that province. More than 1,450 British Columbians attended these fisheries ordered the fishery closed early in the season. meetings and their ideas were taken into consideration.

The minister did this not to deprive fishermen of their rights but Following the June 19 announcement of $400 million in federal to exercise his responsibility to protect the fishery. How would that funding the government held extensive discussions with fishermen situation have been handled under this bill? Would overfishing and other stakeholders on program design. They discussed licence have continued while consultations dragged on and on until retirement, incentives for new selective harvesting techniques, everyone was satisfied that perhaps the fishery should be closed? options for diversifying fishing income and opportunities and the What condition would the stocks have been in by then? impact of changes on coastal communities. It is interesting to note that many stakeholders requested more activity and less consulta- Sometimes we need a person in charge with the authority to act. tion. The government has continued to consult with fishermen on Those with a stake in the fishery should be consulted and they are. how the licence retirement program should be set up and run. 9372 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Supply It is clear that fisheries management in this country is undergo- as great as it is this day. We saw what happened in this House in the ing a transformation. It is this transformation that has been long last month or so. The Standing Committee on Fisheries and sought by fishermen. We can see that fishermen and others with Oceans, which had probably the best chairman that committee ever a stake in the fishery have a greater role today in managing the had, the Liberal member for Gander—Grand Falls, along with fishery than ever before, and that role is growing. eight other Liberals on the committee, made a series of recommen- dations which were agreed to and passed by the committee. D (1200 ) However, when those changes came before the House of Com- mons, none of them were allowed to vote in favour of their own Nevertheless, it is essential that the minister retain the ultimate recommendations. responsibility for conserving and managing the resource for the benefit of all Canadians. After all, it is important to remember that The Liberals will say today that we do not need someone to Canada’s fish resources are managed for the benefit of all Cana- protect the rights of fishers. Perhaps what I should do is bring in dians. Fishermen receive from the minister the privilege of exploit- another bill to protect Liberals on standing committees. That bill ing these resources and we must remember that conservation is the would include a special provision to allow them to make all kinds government’s first priority. of very serious recommendations and then allow them to come to the House of Commons and vote against their own recommenda- If there are no fish there can be no fishers. If we are to ensure tions. that the fishery is there for our children and for their children we must conserve the resource. The bill before the House does nothing A second provision of the bill might be to replace the nine for conservation. As for giving fishermen more say in the manage- members on the standing committee with nine codfish who would ment of the fishery, that process is already well established. say more about what is wrong with the fishery than certainly the Liberal members on the standing committee. It is well for us to talk about rights, but with those rights, particularly in the area of fishing, as in all other rights, as citizens The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault): I must now interrupt the of this country we bear a responsibility to the resource, in particular hon. member. He will have approximately seven minutes left when as we look at conserving that resource for generations to come. It is the bill is brought back before the House. my hope, as we anticipate further discussion on this bill and as we [Translation] anticipate the vote, that we will consider the impact of those rights and responsibilities. The time provided for the consideration of Private Members’ From a drafting perspective this bill is vague. It touches on many Business has now expired and the order is dropped to the bottom of legal issues, including some that are outside federal jurisdiction. the order of precedence on the order paper. That is very clear. Given its vagueness this legislation would be impossible, in all likelihood, to implement in any effective manner. ______It is for these reasons and others which I have not mentioned this morning that I urge my colleagues in the House to reject Bill C-302 when it finally comes to a vote. GOVERNMENT ORDERS Mr. Charlie Power (St. John’s West, PC): Madam Speaker, I know we only have about two minutes left in today’s debate, but I want to make a few preliminary comments before concluding my [Translation] comments at a future date. SUPPLY First, I want to commend the member for New Brunswick Southwest for bringing in an excellent bill which would protect the rights of people who are involved in the traditional fishery all ALLOTTED DAY—EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE across Canada. In the 500 year history of the fishery in Newfound- land, never has there been as great a need to have the rights of Mr. Jean Dubé (Madawaska—Restigouche, PC) moved: fishermen protected. That, in the opinion of this House, the government should continue with the Employment Insurance Small Weeks Adjustment Projects and amend the legislation All the member wanted to do when he talked about the rights of in order to make the adjustment projects a permanent feature of the Employment fishermen was to make sure that fishers have access to and are Insurance Act. involved in the process of fisheries stock assessment, fish con- servation, the setting of fishing quotas, fishing licences and the D (1205) public right to fish. He said: Madam Speaker, I thank you for letting me address the If fishers are not allowed to be involved in that process then motion I am tabling today. I will share my time with the hon. there is something very seriously wrong. Never has the need been member for Burin—St. George’s. October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9373

Supply The purpose of the motion before us today is to invite the [English] government to correct in a permanent fashion the flaws in the Employment Insurance Act. As I was saying earlier, despite warnings about this weakness in the EI act, the government took almost a year to offer some form of I realize that some parliamentarians know very little about the correction to the inequity. In fact, the Liberal response seemed to employment insurance small weeks adjustment projects. Yet, it is anger some business representatives who feared election politics an initiative that applies to 29 regions of Canada where the were behind the small weeks adjustment projects since the an- unemployment rate exceeds 10%. nouncement was made only a few months before the federal election. In fact, regions of Ontario, Quebec, British Columbia, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, the Yukon, the Northwest Territories and the four D (1210 ) Atlantic provinces have participated in adjustment projects. It is an issue that affects tens of thousands of Canadians, and this is why it is important to discuss it today. With this motion the government has the opportunity to prove that the small weeks adjustment projects were not a mere electoral Let us take a moment to look at the context that made it ploy, but an attempt in good faith to help workers accept as many necessary to resort to small weeks employment projects. In 1996, hours of work as they possibly can. In my view, and in the view of the federal government adopted Bill C-12, which included a major my caucus colleagues, the small weeks adjustment projects have reform of the employment insurance program. The changes made been very useful and successful. The preliminary aim of the included using eligibility criteria that were no longer based on the adjustment projects was to ensure that every hour of work counts work week, but on the hours of work, and calculating benefits by toward eligibility for the benefits and encourages people to take all taking into account every week of employment in the previous 26 available work without fear of having their benefits reduced by weeks, including the weeks with few hours of work. working small weeks.

This last point was a problematical one, because including the The federal government adopted two approaches to the adjust- income from these small weeks in the calculation can significantly ment projects to evaluate and compare results. As I said earlier, 29 lower benefits, and this discourages workers from accepting short economic regions across Canada where the unemployment rate is work weeks. consistently above 10% are participating in the program. Eighteen regions in Quebec and the eastern provinces are part of the bundling project. Bundling small weeks means to bundle the Toward the end of January 1997, or a few weeks after total earnings in small weeks to meet the average earnings of the big implementation of the new provisions in the act, three Liberal MPs weeks plus any small week needed to meet the minimum divisor. were mandated to propose solutions to the short weeks problem to the Minister of Human Resources Development. Following up on their recommendations, the minister announced his small weeks Eleven regions in Ontario and the western provinces are partici- adjustment projects on March 5, 1997 What is rather unfortunate pating in the excluding project. Excluding small weeks means that about all this is that the government had been aware of this problem all small weeks not required to meet the minimum divisor will be for close to a year already. ignored for the purpose of calculating benefit levels. They still count toward eligibility and duration. When Bill C-12 was being debated, in fact, Conservative Senator Orville Phillips proposed an amendment intended to remove weeks These adjustment projects are slated to end on November 15, of less than 15 hours from the calculation of benefits. Otherwise, 1998, a mere three weeks away. We do not know the fate of this the senator felt, EI recipients were at risk of drawing reduced valuable program. benefits if they had worked only a few hours in a given week. Unfortunately, that amendment was given the heave-ho by the Most importantly, Canadian workers in the toughest employ- Liberal majority in the Senate. ment areas of the country are still kept guessing.

This same problem was also recognized and brought to the This program has cost the government roughly $130 million a government’s attention by a number of other stakeholders. For year, a mere drop in the bucket when we consider the $7 billion instance, Mathilda Blanchard, a well-known union figure in New yearly surplus in the EI fund. Brunswick, was quoted on November 4, 1996 in L’Acadie Nouvelle as saying ‘‘I really cannot see why this matter does not seem to get picked up in this region. The 26-week factor will do a great deal of My colleagues in the Progressive Conservative Party have harm in a region like ours, which is characterized by seasonal constantly argued since 1996 that the EI surplus belongs to work. Plenty of people will end up having to get through the winter Canadian workers and employers. It does not belong to the Liberal with nothing but a cheque for $60 or so a week coming in. cabinet. 9374 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Supply We have argued for cuts in EI premiums. In fact the chief actuary situation which was leaving people with completely unacceptable has concluded that the EI program could be sustained at a premium benefits, lower even than welfare. of $1.90. Therefore, continuing the small weeks adjustment pro- jects would in no way preclude a substantial decrease in EI Two years ago, as we know, this government introduced a pilot premiums as well. All in all, continuing the small weeks adjust- project that will come to an end in three weeks. But it is not on ment projects would be a positive step toward eliminating disin- November 15 that people will start suffering. They have already centives to work. been suffering for two weeks, three weeks, one month, two months, five months. All those who worked this summer still do not know Back when the projects were announced in 1997, many Liberal whether they will be receiving reasonable benefits on November members stood in this House to praise the value of these projects. 15. The member for Vaudreuil—Soulanges had this to say: ‘‘The adjustments announced yesterday to the Employment Insurance Could this not be pointed out to the minister? I am looking for Act confirm that our primary concern is to encourage people who arguments that would convince him. I would like to hear what the are out of work to return to the workforce’’. member for Madawaska—Restigouche thinks could be done. His motion is a timely one, particularly as it also proposes making the Diane Brushett, the former member for Cumberland—Colches- projects a permanent feature of the legislation so that people from ter, said the following: ‘‘This will ensure that workers in every our regions no longer have to beg. region of the country are able to take full advantage of all available work without having their benefits lowered’’. There is no reason why people should be forced to beg for every little morsel of the EI fund. Could the member for Madawaska— The solicitor general issued this warning: ‘‘In recent days we Restigouche provide the whole picture so that the government have heard a great deal about the small weeks anomaly in the majority will finally understand and so that members, particularly employment insurance program. Make no mistake, it is a serious Liberal members from the maritimes, will support us on this issue? problem that must be fixed’’. Mr. Jean Dubé: Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his The member for Hillsborough was of this opinion: ‘‘The solution question. will work. Small weeks are counted for eligibility but are bundled for calculating benefits. This change gives claimants the best of both worlds. I doubt there are many who would argue that reforms Yes, there are only three weeks left before the end of this project. were not needed’’. The government also knew, two years before, that there were problems with the employment insurance reform. At my first D meeting of the Standing Committee on Human Resources Develop- (1215 ) ment and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, I requested a thorough study of the employment insurance reform. This reform Canadians already have enough difficulty finding permanent or affected a number of regions in Canada, and the poorest Canadians full time work. The last thing they need is an insurance system that were affected. penalizes them for working short weeks. It tells them that the federal government wants them back at work and that all work, Today, we have to equip our young people with the tools they whether it is five hours a week or forty hours a week, should be need to compete on the global market. Obviously, we are referring equally considered. to education. Families are not even capable of paying for their children’s education, which is essential today, because of the lack I invite all members of the House to join our caucus in of employment and the lack of income. Today we see that only supporting Canadian workers by voting in favour of the motion. three weeks are left before the end of this project. The government should perhaps have announced its intention two months ago. [Translation] The employment insurance reform was a mistake from the Mr. Paul Crête (Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup—Témis- outset. The government made these changes only a few weeks couata—Les Basques, BQ): Madam Speaker, I am delighted to before the election. So, if there were problems three weeks before put a question to the member for Madawaska—Restigouche. First the federal election, I am sure there are still problems today. of all, I can tell him that the Bloc Quebecois is 100% in favour of Canadians from coast to coast are waiting to see what the Minister the Conservative Party motion. The riding of Madawaska—Resti- of Human Resources Development recommends. gouche is next door to mine and I know very well that the member’s constituents are experiencing the same problems as mine with respect to this issue. D (1220)

EI benefits have been substantially reduced throughout the The problem is found not only in the Atlantic region, but in eastern Quebec and maritime regions. As soon as it introduced its Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba and western Canada, especially with reform, the present Liberal government realized that there was a the upcoming fisheries problem there. I can tell you that the terrible problem and that a pilot project was needed to correct a workers in western Canada, especially in British Columbia, are October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9375

Supply hoping for comments and a response from the Minister of Human Adjustment programs and projects have been very positive. We Resources Development. should go out and about in our ridings to talk to people who through no fault of their own cannot get full time work, get called in for 20 or 25 hours a week and in many cases get paid the * * * minimum wage. If it was not for the adjustment programs their EI [English] rates would be severely cut.

CANADA CUSTOMS AND REVENUE AGENCY ACT I go on record as saying that adjustment programs have been very positive. I have written the minister and discussed the issue with him as late as Friday. Because we are running out of time BILL C-43—NOTICE OF TIME ALLOCATION quickly I am hoping the minister will bring in his evaluation of the two adjustment programs and make a decision that is positive for Hon. Don Boudria (Leader of the Government in the House the thousands and thousands of workers throughout Canada who of Commons, Lib.): Madam Speaker, I regret to inform the House are relying or counting on the minister to make the right decision, that an agreement could not be reached under the provisions of to continue with the adjustment projects and to make them Standing Orders 78(1) or 78(2) with respect to the second reading permanent. stage of Bill C-43, an act to establish the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency and to amend and repeal other acts as a conse- quence. We should not have to come back here in 18 or 24 months and face another deadline because another temporary measure will be Under the provisions of Standing Order 78(3), I give notice that running out. As a result of adjustment programs and the minister’s a minister of the crown will propose at the next sitting a motion to evaluation we need some permanency in those programs. Workers allot a specific number of days or hours for the consideration and should not have to go another 12, 18 or 24 months and be faced disposal of the proceedings at the said stage. with the same deadline, not knowing if the bundling of small weeks or the elimination of small weeks, whichever the minister chooses, will be upon them again. * * * I appeal to the minister to move quickly, to make a positive SUPPLY decision and to make the decision permanent. It is very important.

ALLOTTED DAY—EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE D (1225 ) The House resumed consideration of the motion. I know Atlantic Canada best. Ridings such as Burin—St. Mr. Bill Matthews (Burin—St. George’s, PC): Madam Speak- George’s have been devastated because of a downturn in the er, I commend my colleague from Madawaska—Restigouche for groundfish industry as a result of the collapse of cod stocks. People putting the motion forward today for debate in the House. It is a who have worked 12 months of the year for most of their lives are matter that is of great concern to many of us who represent areas of striving today to get enough weeks of work to qualify for EI. It has high unemployment. an effect on me, having grown up and worked with those people, to see what they are going through today. There was great public debate throughout the country when the government reformed the EI regulations. There are still many Then people in corner stores and retail outlets are clawed back people who do not fully understand the impact of the changes to the and get only 15 or 20 hours a week because the primary industry. EI Act and the EI regulations. the fishery, is pretty much gone. They rely very heavily on an adjustment program. If they happen to get 12 full weeks of work Ten days ago I met with five union leaders from my riding who and make $250 the employer can only pull them into work for six were very concerned about changes to the EI regulations and about or seven weeks more and they make less than $150 a week. It is the employment insurance small weeks adjustment program. I am very important that the weekly earnings average not be decreased, very pleased to see that the Minister of Human Resources Develop- and that is what those projects do. They are very positive for those ment is listening. I look forward to the minister’s involvement in people. They keep their weekly earnings average up and conse- the debate later today. quently keep their EI benefits rate up. Many of us in the House of Commons cannot identify with what $40, $50 or $80 a week means to many low income families. It In my meeting with union people about 10 days ago there were means that they are able to send their children to school fed, to buy people sitting around the table who worked in fish plants and in some books and clothing, and to heat their homes. To some of us stores. They know the impact of this program. They told me that this amount of money does not seem like a lot, but to many people without adjustment projects, without the bundling of small weeks, in high unemployment areas it is bread and butter on the table. their EI benefits would be so significantly reduced they would not 9376 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Supply be able to maintain their households. That is what it means. That is Could the member for Burin—St. George’s give us some the implication. specific examples of how people in his riding are benefiting by these adjustment measures? So that we can get down to some concrete action, could he tell us which of the pilot programs he My colleague introduced his motion very well. He explained the favours? Is it the bundling or is it the excluding? criteria of the projects very well. I go on record as supporting the motion. I appeal to the minister. In a discussion with him on Friday he told me that he was working hard on this program. I respect and Mr. Bill Matthews: Mr. Speaker, for some reason the parlia- appreciate that. mentary secretary wants to burn me. He wants to call it Burn—St. George’s.

We have about three weeks left. I hope we will get the minister’s On a serious note I did say that it was a positive initiative. They evaluation very soon. I hope we will get a positive decision very have been positive adjustment programs. We only hope the govern- soon so that the thousands of people out and about the country will ment in its wisdom continues with one form or the other. take some comfort in knowing there will be some stability and permanency in the minister’s decision. Let me say to the parliamentary secretary, it basically means that if someone has 14 weeks of $300 earnings and six weeks or seven Whether it is the bundling of small weeks or the elimination of weeks of less than $150 earnings, then the bundling of small weeks small weeks as in Ontario and out west, both adjustment programs which applies in Atlantic Canada keeps the average weekly earn- have been very positive. It comes down to which one the minister ings up. Consequently the EI rate keeps up and they get a higher chooses. Will he choose the bundling of small weeks or will he benefit. Without the bundling of weeks adjustment program, the choose the elimination of small weeks? average weekly income would drop. Consequently they would get lower EI. That is the positive. Those are the specifics.

I hope the minister will participate in the debate later and we will I can tell the parliamentary secretary that in Burin—St. George’s get some sense of where he is coming from. I am looking forward thousands and thousands of people have found the bundling of to the participation of members on all sides of the House in the small weeks to be very positive. It is beneficial to them and their debate. Most of us represent people who are benefiting from families. adjustment programs. We all have some people in our ridings that have benefited from this adjustment program. I look forward to The current surplus in the EI fund is there in part because the their speaking in support of the motion as I do. I move: government reduced the EI benefits across the board. The govern- That the motion be amended by adding after the words ‘‘and amend the ment cannot use the argument that the money is not there to legislation’’ the word ‘‘forthwith’’. continue with the adjustment programs. There is a surplus in the EI account. It is a surplus that has been contributed to—

The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): The amendment is in The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): The hon. member for order. Debate is on the amendment. Sackville—Eastern Shore.

Mr. Wayne Easter (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Mr. Peter Stoffer (Sackville—Eastern Shore, NDP): Mr. Fisheries and Oceans, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I always enjoy listening Speaker, I put on the desk of the member for Burin—St. George’s a to the member for Burin—St. George’s. I am not really surprised. copy of an EI statement that I received from someone on a recent visit to Canso, Nova Scotia. It is quite simple. The EI benefit for a person who is single with minimum weeks and without this D (1230 ) program in place is $25 a week. If they are lucky and are married with children, they get $31 a week. These are actual statements from people whom I recently met in Canso. He talked very much in general terms. To make a proper decision the government needs to deal with specifics in terms of how the I would like the member to comment. If the bundling which I pilot projects are working. agree with on a personal note is not allowed to help those people that find it difficult to get permanent work with full time benefits I am a little surprised that both speakers on this amendment and good salaries, in areas of the country such as where I come never in their initial remarks would congratulate the government from in Atlantic Canada, what should they do? What should those for having seen in the beginning there was a problem with short people who make $25, or $31 for those who are married with weeks and for having fixed that problem and for having coming up children, on EI do? with some adjustment projects to look after it. They should stand and say thank you to the government on this side of the House for Mr. Bill Matthews: Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for having made that great move in the first place. his comment and question. October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9377

Supply It is obvious what people in those situations must do. With address any potential issues that could arise. Soon after the reform weekly incomes of these amounts, they cannot send their children took effect, we identified the small weeks problem. One of the to school fed. If they cannot find a job and the EI rates are $25 major objectives of the reform was to make every hour of work or $31 a week, then it is a sad reflection and a sad thing to have count toward eligibility for employment insurance benefits and to to say there is only one recourse. That is for them to go down encourage people to take all available work. to see the welfare officer at the social assistance office. It soon became evident that there was an anomaly in the system As I said in my opening remarks, for some of us who are that was causing a disincentive for some workers to accept small fortunate, and that is almost all of us that sit in this chamber, we weeks of work as it lowered their benefit levels. We therefore cannot identify with what $40, $50, $70 or $80 more a week really announced a series of adjustment projects targeting 29 high means to the people this provision helps. There is only once unemployment regions across Canada. The small weeks adjust- recourse for those people, which is to go and see the welfare ment projects were put in place to address the disincentive officer. identified by employers and workers.

D (1235) We decided to test two types of adjustment projects. One type included the bundling of small weeks in Atlantic Canada and [Translation] Quebec. The other excluded the small weeks in other provinces and territories. Hon. Pierre S. Pettigrew (Minister of Human Resources Development, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I welcome this opportunity to An assessment of the two types of small weeks projects is speak on the motion presented this morning by the hon. member for currently under way. The collection of data is now being com- Madawaska-Restigouche on employment insurance and small pleted. The findings will permit the government to determine the weeks adjustment projects. About 18 months ago, in my capacity degree to which a disincentive to accept small weeks of work as the Minister of Human Resources Development, I had the exists. A decision on what action may be required over the long run pleasure of moving these projects, which have helped resolve a will be made this fall. problem we had identified according to the government’s wishes. For the time being my department continues to process claims as I am pleased to see that the member recognizes the value of if the program were to be continued. some of the important changes we had to make to the employment insurance system. As the member already knows, the old unem- In light of the fact that we do not have all the information ployment insurance system was 25 years old. It simply no longer required, I am afraid that we cannot support the member’s motion, met the needs of today’s new workforce. but we do recognize his good intentions.

The old system did nothing for those who worked part time, and [Translation] there are many such people. The old system did not recognize the long hours put in by seasonal workers and did nothing to help As the member knows, we are also continuing to monitor the people get back to work. impact of the whole reform on individuals and communities. That is why we took on the difficult task of modernizing the Under the new EI legislation, we are committed to tabling an EI employment insurance system in this country. We have put in place monitoring and assessment report before Parliament every year for a completely new system—it was the first major structural reform five years. We take this commitment very seriously. in 25 years.

Our objective was to find a balance between giving workers the D (1240) temporary income support they need when they lose their job and giving them the tools they need to get back to work. We think it is important to fully understand the impact of the reform and we want to ensure that the program meets the needs of So far, the new EI program is having some success. Over 31,000 all Canadians. The second EI monitoring and assessment report new jobs have been created in areas of high unemployment through should be released next spring. the transitional jobs fund program. Canadians are benefiting from the $2 billion we invested in active employment measures and most Speaking of the EI program inevitably leads me to want to of those who lost their job or quit with a good reason are getting discuss the beneficiaries to unemployed or BU ratio report my income support. department released last week. The opposition, and the spokesper- son for the branch office of the PQ in this parliament in particular, [English] have tried to confuse and frighten workers with their brilliant interpretation of the information contained in this report. The Because of the size of this reform, we also put in place a beneficiaries to unemployed ratio report is full of concrete figures monitoring system to help us assess the impact of the reforms and and statistics on unemployment. 9378 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Supply The opposition has repeatedly tried to mix and match figures labour market. Furthermore, we have the new hires program, which to suit their purposes while refusing to look at the true conclusions is helping employers hire more young Canadians. of the report. The EI program is there to meet the needs of Canadian workers Two of the main issues the BU report tried to address were: who are between jobs. Our government will continue to monitor Whether the BU ratio was a good tool to measure the effectiveness closely the impact of our system and reform. We remain open to of the employment insurance program and whether the employ- resolving problems that arise, like shorts weeks. When this prob- ment insurance program was meeting its objective of providing lem was brought to our attention, we found interesting solutions, temporary income support to Canadians who were between jobs. which the opposition has now approved, and I thank them for appreciating the amount of work we have put into this. The study concluded that the BU ratio is not a good indicator to measure the effectiveness of the EI system. It also concluded that D (1245) the EI system is meeting its objective of providing temporary income support to Canadians who have an attachment to the labour force. In fact, 78% of Canadians who have lost their jobs, or quit Mr. Paul Crête (Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup—Témis- with just cause, are eligible for EI. couata—Les Basques, BQ): Mr. Speaker, the minister claims that it is us, the PQ’s local branch plant, as he likes to call us, who The reason that the BU ratio does not effectively measure the looked at the situation and made false statements. He should be effectiveness of the EI system is because the BU ratio includes all reminded that, last week, Donald Charette wrote an editorial in Le unemployed Canadians. But not all unemployed Canadians are Soleil in which he said ‘‘the first of the two methods, that is the one automatically covered by EI. rightly used by the media, shows that, over the past eight years, the percentage of unemployed who are entitled to a cheque has fallen from 83% to 42%’’. Following the opposition’s logic, what the Bloc would have us do is pay EI benefits to people who have never worked a day in their lives. Obviously, someone who never worked a day in his or Mr. Charette adds that ‘‘the number of those who qualify has her life is not covered under the EI system. But we have other significantly decreased, while the fund has increased at the expense programs to help this person enter the workforce, one of which is of contributors’’. He goes on to say that ‘‘thousands of people are the youth employment strategy. thus excluded from a program that should protect them and these people probably become prime candidates for social assistance’’. Mr. Charette rightly concludes by saying that ‘‘if Minister Petti- If someone decides to quit his or her job to go back to school grew does not have the authority to impose his views, a standing entitled to EI? Of course not, but we have other programs, committee of the Senate and the House of Commons will have to including the Canadian opportunities strategy, to help this person look at the issue and restore some justice through redistribution’’. go back to school. These comments were not made by separatists. They are found Self-employed workers do not pay EI premiums and are there- in editorials across Canada, from the maritimes to British Colum- fore not entitled to EI. Someone who is being paid severance pay is bia. Everyone says that the minister is stealing the employment not entitled to EI until this severance pay has been exhausted. It insurance surplus— seems perfectly obvious to me, but the people across the way do not want to understand. The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member. The government is there for unemployed Canadians who are not eligible for EI but who need help. We have a variety of EI supporting programs, such as the youth employment strategy, Hon. Pierre S. Pettigrew: Mr. Speaker, thank you for giving me which helps youth with the transition from school to work. the opportunity to reply—

We have the Canadian opportunities strategy, which gives Mr. Paul Crête: Mr. Speaker, I was not done with my com- Canadians access to a good education so they can get better jobs. ments. It is the minister who made some kind of claim. We did not We also have the transitional jobs fund, which is creating jobs in hear what he said, but I would like to be allowed to conclude my areas of high unemployment. remarks. I listened to him when he had the floor earlier. Now, it is his turn to listen to me. We have the post-TAGS program to help affected fishers and communities move on with their lives. We have active employment The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): I understand, but five measures helping people get the skills they need to re-enter the minutes are allocated for two questions and two replies. October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9379

Supply Hon. Pierre S. Pettigrew: Mr. Speaker, I object to the unparlia- It is not just the word, it is the form and the context in which the mentary language of the Parti Quebecois member, who is always word is used. pushing a very specific agenda that has nothing to do with helping people improve their situation and working with us constructively, Mr. Monte Solberg (Medicine Hat, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, it is a because the worse things get, the happier he is. pleasure to address the motion by the member for Madawaska— Restigouche. All these people are trying to prove is that the country is not in very good shape, and he knows it. I am very sympathetic to some of the points the hon. member has made. I think he has made an excellent case for some of the flaws According to the opposition member’s logic, people who have in some of the reforms that have occurred under this Liberal never worked or paid EI premiums in their life are entitled to EI government. benefits. The way the member sees it, we should be paying EI benefits to people who have received severance pay. He wants us to I am very concerned and I must criticize the government in the pay— strongest possible terms because here we are three weeks away from the expiry of this program and we have absolutely no [English] evidence at all as to what the impacts are of the program. It is a big program. We have spent somewhere in the range of $230 million so far on the program. Yet we have no evidence and every year we get The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): Excuse me, with criticism from the auditor general coming forward saying programs counsel, I was assured that the hon. member for Kamouraska—Ri- lack clear measurably objectives, there are no ways to measure vière-du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques did not say anything whether they are effective. Now we are in a situation where the unparliamentary. program is coming to an end. My colleagues across the way are arguing that it is a good program. Others like me are saying we just Mr. Jean Dubé: Mr. Speaker, as we know, this bundling project do not know. We do not have any evidence. If we had some and exclusion project affects 29 regions in Canada. It is not only for evidence it would make it a lot easier to support the member’s the Atlantic provinces. It affects Ontario, Quebec, British Colum- motion. bia, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Yukon, Northwest Territories and the four Atlantic provinces. We are in a position where the member I trust wants us to support his motion but on the other hand we have absolutely no Can the minister assure the House today and all the people in evidence. I think it is unreasonable to ask us to support it when it is those 29 regions that the EI applications will be continued to be a sizeable amount of money, $230 million to $260 million, processed after the expiration on November 15? somewhere in that range, without any evidence at all.

Having said that, I appreciate the arguments the member has Hon. Pierre S. Pettigrew: Mr. Speaker, as I said in my made, but to make a decision to support the motion at this point intervention earlier, we are presently looking into the findings. The would be imprudent. collection of data is being completed. The findings will permit the government to determine the degree to which a disincentive to accept small weeks of work exists. A decision on what action will I want to talk about the need for fundamental reform of be required over the long run will be made this fall. But as I said, employment insurance. I am glad that this topic has come up today for the time being my department continues to process claims as if because I think it needs to be discussed. As members know, the the programs were to be continued. I would like once again to opposition parties have spoken jointly for the need for fundamental recognize the very good intentions of the member for Madawas- reform of employment insurance. We have spoken about the need ka—Restigouche who really tries to do constructive work in this to have employers and employees get together and run this fund by House as this parliament can elevate itself to. themselves. We feel it is crazy to allow the government to take this huge employment insurance fund and essentially use it for whatev- er it wants to use it for. We think it is dangerous to have a pool of D (1250) capital that large with government using it for whatever mischie- vous purposes it wants to use it for. The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): We will be resuming debate with the hon. member for Medicine Hat, but over the last We are saying let us take that fund, let us hive it off, let us let couple of weeks the word ‘‘stolen’’ has crept in from time to time employers and employees run the fund. Let us let them set the in debate and in question period. It is a very grey area. If the word benefits and set the premiums. is used in a way that is not attached to a specific person but is in general, then it is not bad but it is on the cusp. I would feel much If I were one of the people on that board the first thing I would do more comfortable if we did not get into that grey area. But if is argue for experience rating. Government members may recall anyone were to use that pejorative word directed to another that the Minister of Finance asked Professor Jack Mintz to produce member directly, that would without question be unparliamentary. a report on taxation on business in this country. 9380 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Supply

D (1255 ) and give it back to workers and small business. A $350 rebate in the form of lower premiums to somebody who is making $39,000 a One of the things he talked about was the need for reform of year is helpful, especially with Christmas coming up. Five hundred employment insurance premiums. He talked about experience dollars a year per employee going back to a small business is rating which has substantial merit. Essentially what this is, if we helpful. It allows those people to withstand this economic down- use the model of the United States, is an insurance scheme that turn the minister has been talking about. would penalize all those companies that lay people off more than their industry average. Why do we not just be fair? What is wrong with that? Why do we not just give people back the money we have taken from them? Not Let us talk about areas where we have a lot of seasonal work only are the four opposition parties in agreement on this issue, we such as in New Brunswick where the mover of this motion comes also know that the provinces agree with this. We also know from. In a situation where we have a lot of seasonal industries, such businesses and labour agree with this. Is it not time that the as the forestry industry, a pulp and paper outfit that lays people off government yielded and forgot about its foolhardy pride and did the more than other pulp and paper companies in that region would see right and fair thing by giving the money back? It is unconscionable its premiums go up. This would then create disincentive to lay that this government is contemplating a $7 billion raid on the EI people off. fund.

There was an excellent documentary on television a few years The minister says the government is not just going to take the ago about how experience rating works and works extraordinarily money, it is going to have a debate on it. What a joke. When we had well in the state of Maine. They used the local Wal-Mart store as an the minister before the finance committee recently to give his example where a number of people are hired on just before economic statement he was making an argument about having this Christmas but instead of letting them go after Christmas it keeps big debate. I said if there were really going to be a debate then why them on and gets them to stock shelves, do painting or fix up the is the $7 billion overpayment already showing up in the projections store in various ways. If these people were let go then it would have for next year. I also asked him why he has already taken for granted to face higher premiums. There is a real positive incentive to keep that the $7 billion will go into the government coffers. He had no people on. answer.

It is time this government started to explore some of these more fundamental reforms which would go a long way to solving some D (1300 ) of the perverse incentives or disincentives we have in our employ- ment insurance system today. I really believe it is time to look at I submit, if this money really does belong to the government that. instead of to the workers, why does the government pay interest on that fund? Why does it pay interest if it is just to itself? Is the I also want to talk about the other big employment insurance government paying interest to itself? I do not think so. It is paying problem we have today. As members know, we have a situation it because it understands intuitively that the money does not belong where we have about a $7 billion overpayment currently sitting in to it. It belongs to workers and to employers. Therefore, the the employment insurance fund, a fund that in my judgment and in government has a moral obligation to give that money back. the judgment of workers and employers belongs to the people who contributed the money in the first place. I am talking here about workers and employers. Government members cannot continue to say ‘‘We are going to have a debate. We have decided that we know better than workers and employers how to use that money and, therefore, we are going We now have the government speculating that it may decide to to confiscate it’’. That is so fundamentally wrong. take that money and spend it. I submit that money does not belong to the government. It belongs to the workers, to the employers, to small businesses and to businesses in general, 95% of which are It points to the increasing arrogance that we see from this small businesses. I condemn this government for talking about government. It seems like no law is unbridgeable by this govern- taking that money. ment whether it is pepper-spraying students or whether it is taking $7 billion from employers and employees. It points to a very ugly To me it is unconscionable that the government would sit there trend that we see in this government. for a number of years and allow that fund to balance its budget and then, when workers have balanced the budget, to say as thanks that I hope my hon. colleagues will join me in condemning the it is going to take that $7 billion overpayment that comes in every government for what it is proposing to do and ask for a more year and keep it for itself. That is unbelievable. fundamental debate about employment insurance, one in which we will have the chance to hold this government accountable for its I asked the government why it does not just obey the law and do confiscation of the hard-earned premiums of workers and employ- what the law is saying it should do which is to reduce the premiums ers. October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9381

Supply Mr. Mark Muise (West Nova, PC): Madam Speaker, I too In other words, they were not the workers and the businesses that come from a riding that is very hard hit by unemployment. I see he is talking about. In fact, the average taxpayer had to reach into the negative impact and the ramifications that high unemployment their pockets and pay money into that program. has.

D (1305 ) I received a letter from an owner-operator of a quick service restaurant who told me that he has to pay EI premiums on When the member says ‘‘Give that money back to whom it employees’ hours from day one, yet these young people cannot belongs’’, has he taken into account the reality that taxpayers have claim EI. That creates a surplus in the fund that the employer paid money to support the plan over the years? cannot ask for in return. I see this as just another problem that is created by this whole system. Secondly, in my province of Ontario the premier and his party are making a lot of the fact that Ontario has a net outflow to support Many times I have had the opportunity to say that the Reform the employment insurance system. He thinks this is a bad thing. I Party is not a national party or a true national party. When the hon. suppose within his own province he can also find shifts between member says that he is not prepared to support the motion put forth industries. In my riding, General Motors, for instance, argues that it by my hon. colleague from Madawaska—Restigouche, once more I only gets 60 cents on the dollar in the employment insurance see that Reformers are ignoring the maritimes and the Atlantic program. provinces. In his province of Alberta, does the member also support the idea Mr. Monte Solberg: Madam Speaker, all I can say to my hon. that we should balkanize the plan and try to make it sustainable friend is that he cannot have it both ways. We just had the member within provincial boundaries, or is there a realization that there is for Madawaska—Restigouche say that this program affects the more to this country than just individual provincial concerns? entire country. Now he is saying it is all about maritimers. He cannot have it both ways. Mr. Monte Solberg: Madam Speaker, the first point I would make is that employers and employees have kicked in $19 billion As a matter of fact, I would submit that the Reform Party is a more than they have drawn out in employment insurance benefits. national party. I was in Nova Scotia this weekend, talking to people there. In fact, I see the hon. member down the way whose riding I I would argue that of course we need to hide this fund off so that was in. I talked to people there and I can say they are profoundly we are not in a situation where either the government has to kick unhappy with the choices of the traditional parties, which is why I money in or employers have to kick money in to bail out the was invited to go there. government. The fact is that this government pays $711 million in interest on the fund as it is right now. I do not think that helps If bigger social programs were the solution to the problems of anybody, certainly not taxpayers in general. the people in Atlantic Canada, New Brunswickers, Nova Scotians, people in Newfoundland and Prince Edward Island, then those The second point I would make is that we believe that employers people would be extraordinarily well off. I do not think it has and employees should set the benefits and the premiums. That is worked that way. the way to handle this problem and that would not balkanize Canadians. I would argue that it would probably go a long way in We need a new program to create jobs. The best social program de-politicizing EI and would make the program a lot more effec- in the world is a permanent, good job, not tinkering with the current tive. system. [Translation] My friend should consider that perhaps after 30 years the way he and his party have gone simply has not worked. Maybe it is time Mr. Paul Crête (Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup—Témis- for a new approach for all Canadians, in particular for the people of couata—Les Basques, BQ): Madam Speaker, I am delighted to Atlantic Canada. speak today to the motion presented by the member for Madawas- ka—Restigouche, whom I congratulate on his choice of topic. Mr. Alex Shepherd (Durham, Lib.): Madam Speaker, I lis- tened intently to the member’s debate. We are talking about the I cannot say the same for the Minister of Human Resources surpluses we have had in the EI account for the last several years. Development, a technocrat who basically lets the federal bureau- However, the thing that seems to be missing is that the history of cracy order him around. the plan has been deficits. There were years in which there were deficits and during those periods the Canadian taxpayer had to top A pilot project to correct a glaring oversight in the EI reform was up the fund. introduced in March 1997, a mere two months after the reform first 9382 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Supply took effect. The reform took effect January 1, 1997 and in March He says that officials will continue to calculate things as they the government realized there was a glaring oversight. No one in have been doing. It is this sort of attitude and behaviour I find the government had anticipated it. A pilot project, which will end unacceptable. on November 15 of this year, was put in place. These people are not administering their own money, they are Basically, this pilot project allows an individual who has been administering money workers and employers pay into the employ- employed for 20 weeks at $450 a week and six small weeks at $60 a ment insurance plan. The issue is the fact that people must no week, to receive benefits of $245 a week. Without the pilot project, longer be forced to beg to collect their own money. Behind this he would receive $198 a week. This is not a huge salary. The annual motion is the question of dignity. This is why it is vital the salary of someone earning $450 a week is $23,400. If he works full government look very seriously at this problem. time, members can imagine the impact of $50 a week less on his budget. I would like to remind the Liberal members particularly those from the maritimes, of something. They are going to have to vote There are now only three weeks to go in the pilot project and the this evening. When you vote on this motion, remember the people minister is still unable to tell us if his department has evaluated the like Francis LeBlanc and Doug Young who, here in this House, situation properly, if it will extend the pilot project, terminate it or defended the government’s unacceptable positions, on the very come up with something else. issue of unemployment insurance reform. Today, they no longer sit here, because they were sent a very clear message by the popula- This is wrong, because it is not the day after November 15 that tion. this is going to hit people. It is already happening. People are already busy calculating how much they are going to have to manage on for the winter, and they do not know today whether the I think it would be doing a favour to the current Liberal program will counteract the negative effect of the small weeks, members, especially those from the maritimes, but those from whether it will have a heavy impact on their budgets. everywhere else in Canada too, because the small weeks plan exists for everyone. Its impact is felt not only in regions where there are seasonal workers. Its impact is felt in Montreal, in the west and That is what we want to say in today’s motion. We want to tell throughout Canada. the government ‘‘Everybody is saying the surplus in the EI fund is excessive’’. They say there is a $20 billion surplus in the fund. The present pilot project costs between $100 and $125 million yearly, This evening we will have to decide whether the plan will more or less. It takes about one-half of 1% of the $20 billion continue. We will have to decide whether it will continue and be surplus to ensure people have the minimum income required for incorporated in the law. These two decisions will have to be made them and their families to be able to survive. at the end of the day. All members in this House will have to vote. They will have to decide whether the person I referred to earlier, We are facing a situation where a government is accumulating a who earns $450 a week during 20 weeks, should be entitled to keep surplus at the expense of those who earn the least, because the $20 receiving this $50 or have his or her benefits cut by $50. billion surplus was built up while the small weeks projects were in place. People like us make a decent income; we make good money, we can get by. But after a vote has been taken and we have left this D (1310) House, we must remember that voting against this motion means taking $50 a week from workers who earn $20,000, $25,000 or $30,000 a year. The ministerial greediness behind this method of calculation is obvious, that of the Minister of Finance in particular. The Minister of Human Resources Development does not seem in the least Even if the government were ultimately to extend the program, anxious to defend his people. Instead, he seems totally dependent the citizens, workers and employers of this country deserve a on what the Minister of Finance decides on his behalf. minimum of respect. This government must absolutely wake up and put forward a proposal, saying ‘‘We agree to extend the small weeks program, at least until the consequences are known. We This government still wants to take another $100 million on top cannot tell if it is really effective, but we do know a few things’’. of the $20 billion; always a little bit more, but Canada’s social protection is being destroyed and that is where the danger lies. This is a situation that needs to be remedied. This pilot project has been We know it costs between $100 million and $125 million a year in place for two years. It has been in operation, and there are to operate, out of a $20 billion surplus in the EI fund. We also know masses of public servants to evaluate it. We are three weeks away that it helps low income workers. Seasonal workers are the ones from the end of the pilot project. The member for Madawaska— who are affected the most. We know that poverty has increased Restigouche wants to know from the minister ‘‘Will the project be tremendously across Canada in recent years. The middle class is extended or not?’’ He is unable to give us an answer. disappearing. October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9383

Supply It is over the EI system that the federal government has the groups in their ridings to find out whether people will be going to greatest control. The provinces are not necessarily the ones that soup kitchens because of the choice that will be made this evening. should act on this. Money should be put back into transfer payments, but there are actions that could taken directly from here. The decision can be made to put an end to this escalating poverty, I invite all members to give this some thought before they vote. to at least let people retain their same level of income Most A positive result would put a stop to the bureaucratic machinery particularly, they can be allowed to retain their dignity. and give workers back the dignity they deserve.

[English] Do you know what dignity means? It means that, when a worker earns a salary and is entitled to insurance, at the end of the day, that insurance program will be respected, and the rules will not be Mr. Pat Martin (Winnipeg Centre, NDP): Madam Speaker, I changed part way through. am pleased to speak to the opposition day motion put forward by the Progressive Conservatives. Our caucus is pleased to support the Everyone who worked in seasonal employment this summer was motion for a variety of reasons. We are critical that the motion does covered by a system that included this program. For weeks we have not go nearly far enough. We would much rather debate the EI Act been asking the government, particularly the Liberal minister—and and argue for its reform. It is clearly dysfunctional and broken. clearly he is not a spokesperson for the Parti Quebecois, nor are we, but he is I am sure the spokesperson for all of the bureaucrats in his The EI system is supposed to provide income maintenance for department—to tell us whether he is capable of putting on the table unemployed workers. It is pretty straightforward. That is the deal. positions like those set out this morning. That is the pact most working people understand. When they have something deducted from their paycheques for a specific reason, He has said that the calculations would continue as before but there is a reasonable expectation that they should be allowed to that he could not tell us whether the program would be extended, collect income maintenance should they find themselves unfortu- whether the legislation would be changed. He cannot tell us nate enough to become unemployed. anything. What point is there in having a Minister of Human Resources Development if he is incapable of managing his main We approve of other designated uses. We find there is merit to area of responsibility, employment insurance? the motion. We believe the small weeks pilot project was necessary and that it had to take place. Obviously too many people were being D penalized by the divisor rule which was put in place with the (1315) Liberal amendments to the EI system.

Canada is at a point in time when thought must be given to The divisor rule is patently unfair in that it brings down the stimulating the economy and ensuring that consumption will benefit for the unemployed worker by averaging all the weeks continue. The federal government has a tool available to it. Now leading up to the layoff and not just the weeks in which they that there are problems with international demand and we can no worked. In other words, dead weeks or small earning weeks were longer be sure there will be a market in Asia for our products, let us being folded into the package which brought down the average. Not at least use the tools we have available to us, let us cut employment only do less than 40% of unemployed people qualify for any insurance contributions, let us give people a program that at least benefit at all, but those who are lucky enough to qualify for some gives families a decent income. benefit get less money and for a shorter period of time.

The minister will never again have to give the answer he gave The hon. Minister for Human Resources Development tried to this morning on television, when a CBC reporter from the east argue that those figures were not accurate. He referred to an coast asked when he would be going to New Brunswick. The analysis on employment insurance benefit coverage recently com- minister’s response: ‘‘I tried to go there in June, but I have not missioned and released by HRDC. Holding the report as proof he found the time yet’’. made the argument that 78% of all unemployed workers actually qualified for EI. Nobody believes that. The media do not believe it. A person who is afraid to meet people and does not feel capable Recent editorials do not believe it. It simply is not true. of explaining to them why decisions are made, should no longer be minister. D (1320 ) This evening, when all the members vote on the motion, they should also show their courage. I think it is important that they The minister made the allegation that opposition critics in this think about all the people in their ridings who will be affected. area were reading the report too selectively, misquoting and taking Those members who do not understand the impact can call the things out of context. In actual fact the minister is taking things out people in their ridings to find out. They can call the community of context. The report clearly states as a summary of the study that 9384 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Supply the regular EI beneficiaries to unemployment ratio or the BU As a journeyman carpenter I served my time as an apprentice. ratio—some people call it the BS ratio—had declined by almost When I went to community college there was no waiting period for 50% in the 1990s, falling from a level of 83% in 1989 to 42% in the EI to kick in. Now people are laid off from their job to go to 1997. school for eight weeks, six weeks or whatever their trade dictates, and there is a two week period where they do not get any income at all. The result has been that many apprentices are simply choosing That is the figure we hear most commonly quoted in the media not to take their in-school component. They are not going to school and in our own criticisms. Critics from labour and all different because they cannot go for two weeks without earnings. groups say that approximately 40% of unemployed workers qualify for EI. Clearly the system is dysfunctional and broken. It is no wonder there is a huge surplus. It is not hard to develop a surplus The total savings to the EI system for reinstating this waiting when nobody qualifies any more and the few people who do qualify period for students was $10 million per year. The fund is showing a are getting reduced benefits and for a shorter period of time. surplus of $500 million per month and the apprenticeship system has been gutted for the sake of $10 million per year. That kind of logic simply was not thought out well and should be reversed With that huge surplus—and I am glad other speakers raised it as immediately. an issue—we are hearing all kinds of creative ideas on how to spend money that clearly is not theirs to spend. Some people argue we should be spending it on health and social programs. Some of Actually the building trades unions making this argument have a the premiers of the provinces are even saying that. Some people say variety of good recommendations for how we can fix the EI we should use it for deficit reduction, which is what the Minister of system. One of the things they point to is that all the changes have Finance has used the surplus for. Almost unbelievably the Business not even kicked in yet. It will actually get worse in the next year. I Council on National Issues is calling for tax cuts. guess in the government’s mind it will get better because the surplus will be even bigger. One of the changes that will kick in next year is the clawback or the threshold people reach before their In some sort of perverse version of Sherwood Forest we have the EI benefits are clawed back. It used to be $63,000 a year. Those BCNI advocating that we rob from the poor to give the rich yet making more than $63,000 a year would start losing their benefits. another tax cut. It is almost incomprehensible. Shear perversity is They would be clawed back. Everybody agreed that was fair, that what I call it. Fortunately that idea has not caught on in any anyone making $60,000 a year should not be collecting EI and meaningful way. should be able to put some money away.

Then we have people advocating that we should be cutting D (1325 ) premiums with the surplus. A common theme in the business community is that it should be returned to business and employees through premium cuts. With this set of changes it was reduced to $48,750. I guess we could argue whether or not that is fair. As of next year it will be $39,000. People making more than $39,000 will have their EI Except for my caucus no one seems to be raising the issue of benefits clawed back. increasing the benefits and lowering the bar for eligibility so that more people qualify. What could be more simple? The money is I come from the building trades. A journey person might make deducted from our paycheques every week. To use it for anything $20 or $25 an hour. If they are lucky to get eight or nine months of but income maintenance would be a breach of trust at the very least work in, they might make $39,000 a year. Hopefully they will. and out and out theft in the worst case scenario. To take money However they still have three months without earnings. That from a person’s cheque for a specific purpose and to use it for $39,000 a year is not a huge amount of money. They are in a very something completely different is fundamentally wrong. high tax bracket. They do not get to keep the whole $39,000.

As we talk about the $20 billion surplus, an almost inconceivable I argue that they should not penalized for collecting what is amount of money in most people’s minds, obviously it should be rightfully theirs for the three or four months they need it to span used to provide income maintenance. It should be put it in the that period of unemployment. It is to everybody’s benefit if we can pockets of working people when they find themselves unfortunate keep people in those occupations during slow times so that they are enough to be unemployed. They will spend the money in the available when the industry needs them the next spring. Otherwise community. It has the multiplier effect and residual benefits. they will find some other kind of work, leave town or move. It is as simple as that. Another point has not come up. Many of the changes to EI were quite insignificant when we look at the bigger picture of how few My main criticism of the opposition day motion is that I wish it people qualify. One of the changes that went by almost unnoticed went a lot further so that we could have a substantial debate about was that of people serving their apprenticeship training in a EI reform. I can only think the reason it was limited to such a community college. There is now a two week waiting period. narrow scope was that perhaps they were snookered by the October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9385

Supply government. Maybe there was some optimism that the Minister of poverty rates in the country. Representing unemployed people in Human Resources Development would see the logic in what they the province of Quebec should be a huge priority for him. He were saying and would announce today that the small weeks certainly should not question the sincerity of other representatives program is a good idea, is necessary, and that they should be from the province of Quebec who are sincerely concerned about the maintaining it after November 15. Maybe that was the optimism failure of the EI system. which motivated the people who moved the opposition day motion.

D (1330 ) In actual fact I think they have been hoodwinked. The Minister of Human Resources Development just stood and said that they were not interested in extending the small weeks program. He was The hon. member raised another interesting point which I wish I not interested in jeopardizing the windfall of $7 billion a year that had time to comment on. He is quite right that all four opposition they pull out of the EI program. parties joined together in their demand for an independent fund. We want the EI fund to be unique and fully separate from general revenues. This is the only way we can be sure that future finance [Translation] ministers are not tempted to put their hand in the cookie jar and grab money that clearly is not theirs to use it for purposes not designated by the fund. It is something on which we should keep Mr. Paul Crête (Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup—Témis- the pressure. The general public understands why this is necessary. couata—Les Basques, BQ): Madam Speaker, I listened to my Business, labour and all four opposition parties will continue to call colleague’s speech with interest. I would like him to comment on for that. the position the minister took earlier. He said that, as Quebec’s sovereignist representatives, all we want to do is raise doubts about the Canadian system. I would like the member, to expose the Mr. Gerald Keddy (South Shore, PC): Madam Speaker, the credibility of this issue, to remind the House that there are national question is for the member for Winnipeg Centre. concerns, but there are also social issues. However, while I am on my feet I would like to congratulate the A few weeks ago, the opposition parties unanimously proposed member for Madawaska—Restigouche for presenting this motion to the government that management of the employment insurance today and express my incredulity at Reform members and the fact fund be given to an independent commission. The other opposition that they dare to state in the House that they would not support this parties did not hide behind the fact that we might be sovereignists. motion. Give your head a shake, boys. Give your head a shake. They listened to and weighed the merits of this proposal, which Think about it. received the support of the Canadian Labour Congress, Quebec’s labour unions, a number of business associations, and especially This motion is not about trying to find EI for someone who is not representatives of small and medium sized businesses. working. This motion is not about some type of giveaway. This motion is about bundling of weeks for people who already work, to Could the hon. member tell the minister that, in this matter, it is allow them to actually benefit from the EI program. That is the type not our intention to give the government a hard time, but to ensure of thing we are supposed to support in this House as the Parliament that the law works properly and to close the loophole created by the of Canada, to look out for those people who need some assistance. inclusion of small weeks in the calculation of EI benefits? I would like to qualify a few statistics and take the fishery as an example. Less than one year ago there were 34,000 workers out of Could the hon. member tell this House that people today want work in the east coast fishery. Seventy-three per cent of them had nothing more than to be sure people will not be getting $200 a week no high school education and 67%— instead of $250, when they need it to live, and that we are awaiting the government’s decision to continue the program? The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault): The time has run out. The hon. member for Winnipeg Centre on a quick response. [English]

Mr. Pat Martin: Madam Speaker, in reaction to the comments Mr. Pat Martin: Madam Speaker, I thank the member for his made by the member, he is being critical of the Reform Party for remarks. He is quite right. failing to vote in favour of this motion. Frankly the motion as I pointed out really does not go to the heart of the issue. Perhaps that is the reservation some of the members of the Reform Party have I was very disappointed to hear the Minister of Human Re- with the motion. sources Development try to trivialize this argument by taking a cheap shot, questioning the motives and the sincerity of the speakers from the Bloc Quebecois. Frankly the minister of HRD I wish it went much further in calling for substantial EI reform. I represents a riding that has one of the highest unemployment and wish the Progressive Conservatives had taken the opportunity with 9386 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Supply this opposition day motion to call for an independent fund. Then I It has been pointed out that a Progressive Conservative senator think they would get unanimity on the opposition side. proposed in May 1996 that weeks with less than 15 hours of insurable earnings should not be counted as weeks of work when calculating an individual’s EI benefit rate. The senator argued that Mrs. Elsie Wayne (Saint John, PC): Madam Speaker, first I otherwise claimants could end up with lower benefits if they want to thank my colleague from Madawaska—Restigouche for worked just a few hours in one week thereby discouraging these putting forth the motion before us today. Also, I want to inform individuals to take part time work. you, Madam Speaker, that I will be splitting my time with my colleague, the hon. member for Chicoutimi. A year later this disincentive to work in the EI legislation was When the last round of employment insurance changes was confirmed. Pilot projects were launched to look into addressing the being proposed by this government, I spoke out against aspects of ‘‘small weeks issue’’. the legislation that would penalize people who want to work, but this government did not listen. My party pointed out then that the When this government engaged in its so-called social policy effect of some parts of Bill C-12, the Employment Insurance Act, review in 1994, I spoke in the House about the need to reform our would encourage some to say no to part time work because they social safety net. Canada’s income security programs had been would be worse off if they said yes. designed at a time when unemployment was a brief condition between jobs, when the one income, two parent family was the rule Today there are less than 40% of the unemployed who qualify, and when child poverty was not measured. whereas before under the other system 80% were eligible. Every- one in this House should stop and think about those men and I spoke back then about the need for reforms that would reorient women who have children they want to feed, educate and care for passive income support programs to an active investment in and they do not have any money for food or clothes. people, reforms that would remove barriers that prevent many from becoming active members of the labour force and reforms that I was at the finance committee meeting in Saint John, New would replace disjointed programs with a coherent system. Instead Brunswick last Monday, a week ago today, on the prebudget of adhering to these principles, some of the EI reforms proposed debate. A gentleman had flown in from Newfoundland. I never and passed by this Liberal government actually discourage people heard such a heart-rending report in my life about what was to go to work. happening in Newfoundland and how those people were suffering. I have pointed out before and I say again that there are people in D parts of Atlantic Canada who are considered frequent users of EI. It (1335) is not because they are lazy or because they are abusing the system. It is because some parts of the economy are highly seasonal. I know One of my colleagues from Nova Scotia started to speak about there are people both on the opposition and government sides that the fishermen. It is a serious matter and I get very disturbed when I do not understand about the seasonal system. That is why they need hear someone from the Reform Party say that it was my party that programs that will allow them to adjust and move with the did this to the Atlantic region. changing times. These people do not need programs that cut them off at the knees. They are people who want to work. Let me say this. My riding of Saint John, New Brunswick had one of the lowest unemployment rates that we had had in many Employment insurance as helpful as it is does not bring the same years. Things were great. The shipyard was going full blast. Do we return both financially and spiritually that a job does. That is why have a national shipbuilding policy now? No. The shipyard in we have proposed the motion we are debating today. That is why Quebec is down. The shipyard in Saint John is down. Most of the we are urging that this House on both sides, everyone, be allowed shipyards in all of Atlantic Canada are down. to consider amending the EI act, allow workers either to eliminate small weeks of work from the calculation of benefits or bundle those small weeks together. There has to be some compassion on the government side. The government has to start thinking about those people. It really hurts when I men come to my office. Never in the 25 years that I have Good public policy encourages work, self-sufficiency, fairness been involved both locally and here in Ottawa up until this past and dignity. The small weeks provision in the EI act does not do year has a man come to my office crying ‘‘Please, I will sweep the this. streets. I do not care what it is. I just want to look after my children’’. During the 1994 social policy review, I also spoke out against raising taxes. I said then and I maintain today that the challenge is The Progressive Conservative Party tried to improve the EI to use money already in the system to make programs as flexible as legislation in the Senate in the last parliament. Our amendments possible so recipients can receive the benefits that help them were rejected by the Liberal majority in the Senate. become self-reliant and meet their needs. October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9387

Supply That is also why I have been asking the government to lower Mr. Alex Shepherd (Durham, Lib.): Madam Speaker, I lis- the excessive EI premiums since 1996. The government is gouging tened intently to the member’s very impassioned plea for the the Canadian workers who are already overtaxed and it is stifling people in Atlantic Canada. I must say I was somewhat moved by it. job creation. I wonder if she is aware of the fact that payroll taxes in Canada D (1340) are one of the lowest in the industrialized world. The way she talked about them made it sound like they were about the highest. In fact, they are one of the lowest, which makes us a competitive The Minister of Finance has been overtaxing Canadian workers place in which to do business. and employers through excessive employment insurance premiums to pad his deficit numbers. He has said as much. I hope all of my colleagues on the government side remember when the Prime My province of Ontario has a premier who has pointed to the EI Minister and the Minister of Finance stated that these high taxes system as being an unfair transfer from the province of Ontario make us lose jobs, that jobs cannot be created, that people in the essentially to Atlantic Canada. He is saying ‘‘We already pay business community will not expand when they have high taxes. money through a transfer payments mechanism, through equaliza- tion grants. We do not understand why we should have to pay more money through the EI system to support places like Atlantic The Prime Minister, the Minister of Finance and their colleagues Canada’’. want to use the surplus in the fund to pay for programs that the fund is not meant to finance. The money in the EI fund is designed to provide temporary income support to unemployed Canadians. That Can the member comment on the compassion of the premier of money belongs to Canadian workers and their employers. It does Ontario? not belong to the finance minister or any other minister of this government. Mrs. Elsie Wayne: Madam Speaker, this is a national issue, not a provincial issue. In February 1994 the finance minister told Canadians in his first budget that, as I have stated, payroll taxes are a barrier to jobs. D (1345 ) They truly are. All Canadians know that there have been about 40 tax hikes since this government came to power. I say to the hon. member that everybody in this House needs to have a history lesson on the role played by Atlantic Canada, My little daughter-in-law said to me the other day ‘‘Mother, I do particularly my city which is Canada’s first incorporated city by not know what has happened. I always put money away at the end royal charter, in building this whole country from coast to coast. of the month for Lindsay’s and Matthew’s education but we do not Everybody, particularly our friends out west and those in Ontario, have any money any more’’. I said ‘‘Dear, it is because of the taxes need to travel this country to find out exactly what our people are you have to pay. It is because of what they have done to you’’. like. Two weeks ago a person from Vancouver came to me and told me that my city was the nicest city in the whole of Canada. It is difficult. Back when the finance minister talked about the barrier to jobs that payroll taxes were, his context was a set of As far as Atlantic Canadians go, we get hurt when we hear employment insurance benefit cuts proposed by the Liberals that people from Ontario and out west refer to us as Atlantica and a drag were supposed to allow for lower EI premiums, not a cash grab at on society. All our people want is their dignity. If we had a the expense of Canadians to fund projects unrelated to the objec- government that was going to look at keeping those adjustments in tives of the EI legislation, for short term political gain. place then we could tell Atlantic Canadians that this government also cares for them. We are really concerned. We are concerned about what is happening with the EI fund. The auditor general has stated himself I am asking members to speak to the minister. I am asking that he has concerns about what is happening with this government. members to speak out for our people. I am asking members on the I hope the government does not fire him. Every time someone government side to fight for our people to make sure they have speaks out, they are gone the next week. their dignity.

Responsible governments recognize when bad public policy Mr. Monte Solberg (Medicine Hat, Ref.): Madam Speaker, I decisions hurt Canadians and they take action to correct their compliment the member for Saint John on her remarks. She made mistakes. I urge this government to recognize the mistakes that are some excellent points. there. I urge this government and all members of the Liberal government to do the right thing for those people out there. Have The one question I have for her is somewhat in response to a the needed compassion. Reach out to those people who need help. question that was asked earlier by a Liberal member. Is it not a fact Do not hurt them any more. The government is taking away their that if we went into a recession tomorrow the government would be dignity. We want to give them their dignity back. Do not make forced to borrow the $19 billion that it would have to pay out to them plead. unemployed Canadians? Is it not true that it would be a lot better to 9388 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Supply have that money in a separate fund where the government could not Mr. Murray in Le Droit, following the last budget: ‘‘It took all these get its hands on it to misuse for all kinds of political ends? years for the unpopular measures taken by the Conservatives to produce the conclusive results that we are witnessing today’’. Mrs. Elsie Wayne: Madam Speaker, we have already taken a stand. We have already said that there should be a commission for the employers and employees that looks after the surplus. This Whenever we rise in this House, we are regularly told ‘‘you commission should dictate how that surplus is used. It should be Conservatives should be ashamed. Everything you did was independent of the government. We have taken that stand. We all wrong’’. I am pleased to have been around when the growing debt agree on this side of the House. I am just waiting for that side of the was brought under control. I want to take a minute to talk about House to agree as well. this, because it is important. We must put the 1974-1984 period in its proper perspective. Mr. John Cannis (Scarborough Centre, Lib.): Madam Speak- er, let me remind the member for Saint John about a little history. It was the Conservative government in 1986 that passed legislation During that period, the Liberals increased the debt from $18 which permitted the funds to be used as they are today. billion to $200 billion. The important thing here is the rate of increase. Under the Liberals, the debt grew elevenfold in a decade. Let me also remind the member that this Liberal government has Under the Conservatives, it increased twofold over a period of nine spent the last five years fixing the problems we inherited. For years. However, let us not forget that we also took important example, in 1993 the EI was pegged at $3.30 per $100. We have measures, including the signing of the free trade agreement that since been bringing it down to what it is today which is $2.70. If the allowed us, among other things, to double our exports to the member really wants to talk to her granddaughter she should be American market. The GST also helped the government reduce the telling her the truth. deficit. The purpose of all these initiatives was to alleviate the burden of Canadian taxpayers. All these measures could not have Mrs. Elsie Wayne: Madam Speaker, in the last year of the been in effect for just one year. They had to be implemented over a former PC government EI premiums were frozen at $3.00 per $100 number of years. of insurable earnings. In 1994 the Liberals raised the level to $3.07 which I think the member forgot about. Despite the royal commissions, the standing committees and so The member should take a look at history and what Trudeau did forth, the Liberals always voted against these measures that were and the mess he left this country in when we took over. essentially good for the future of our country. They always voted against them. I am definitely not about to go on a guilt trip here. [Translation] According to the Reform and Liberal parties, the motion my colleague is proposing today is not a structural one. Mr. André Harvey (Chicoutimi, PC): Madam Speaker, allow me to congratulate our acting leader, who is doing an extraordinary It is most certainly a structural measure for the families of this job for our party. She just demonstrated it again by defending some really important causes for the poor. country. It is a structural measure for the poor people of Quebec, the maritimes, western Canada, Ontario and elsewhere. But the government does not seem to want to take it seriously. I repeat, as First of all, I want to thank the hon. member for Madawaska— Restigouche for tabling a motion that shows great sensitivity on his my colleague, the member for Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup— part. Témiscouata—Les Basques, pointed out a few minutes ago, for the vast majority of Canadian families, $25, $40, $50 is the difference Earlier, I heard a Reform Party member say that the motion was between surviving and not surviving. ‘‘mesure étroite’’? too narrow. Go ask children in families where the difference in terms of survival, adequate clothing and food is often a mere $25, Members should try telling single parents that asking for an $30, $40 or $50 what they think about this. extension of the small weeks project is too limited an approach, as one of our Reform Party colleagues was saying, when we know I say to the member who suggested that today’s motion is too very well that some people are having trouble just surviving. Young narrow, that he should go and repeat his comment to his constitu- people are going to school in the morning on an empty stomach. ents. I am convinced he would not get a very positive reaction. There are serious problems of poverty in our country.

D (1350) While I am on the topic, I would like to make another point. I A Conservative member who rises in this House always gets the was part of a government with a very substantial agenda in all same reaction: ‘‘Under the Conservatives—’’. I think we should areas, including regional development, the environment and acid also talk about the current government’s track record in terms of rain—I was present at the signing—trade and tax reform. Right public finance. So here is an excerpt from an editorial written by now, none of these items are on the government’s agenda. October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9389

S. O. 31 I would propose one item for the government and this country to [English] tackle: the fight against poverty, which is the number one problem in the country right now. I read an article in which Michel Vastel The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): The hon. member has said ‘‘Elected representatives are not listening to anyone any five minutes for questions and comments but we are just about at more’’. That is serious. the time for Statements by Members. We will have the full five minutes for questions and comments after question period. Today, a motion was proposed to help the poorest of the poor in our country. While I have nothing against deputy ministers or senior government officials, the Parliament of Canada is paying ______closer attention to what senior officers say than to what the poor are saying, when it is a well-known fact that the taxpayers see millions and billions taken out of their pockets without benefiting from any return on their investment. STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS It is my pleasure to ask all my colleagues in this House to support this extremely important measure proposed by one of our colleagues from a riding that is not among the richest in the [English] country. TASTE OF THE DANFORTH FESTIVAL D (1355) Mr. John Cannis (Scarborough Centre, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I It does not resolve the whole issue of employment insurance, of take this opportunity to congratulate the organizers of the Taste of course, but at least it is a small step that could immediately benefit the Danforth Festival, an annual Greek food and cultural festival in every Canadian family whose extremely low income is not enough Toronto. They put together a well organized event that offered the to ensure adequate subsistence for their children. thousands of people who attended a safe environment, excellent food and entertainment. We must bear in mind that the government is not a private insurance company. Overcontributions like those currently being More so, I congratulate and applaud their successful efforts in paid by every worker and employer in Canada are inequitable and raising funds in the amount of $50,500 which they kindly donated cannot be allowed to continue. A start must be made with a little to the East General Hospital in Toronto. That is giving something measure such as we are requesting today. It is about paying back to the community. attention to Canada’s poorest citizens. It does not mean establish- ing a structural measure, but it does give us the opportunity to Bravo to the organizers of the Taste of the Danforth Festival. propose a solution to the surplus in the employment insurance Keep up the good work and next year I invite everyone to take fund. It would at least enable us to ensure the survival of the some time to take part in this beautiful festival. By doing so not poorest families. only will people enjoy themselves but will at the same time contribute something to the community. I also understand that, for the minister, it is difficult to travel across the country. He is having a really hard time convincing himself to visit the maritimes. Clearly, a politician needs to be able * * * to remember some things. We know about that. It is true in Quebec and it is true in all the regions of the country. BRITISH COLUMBIA Politicians have to choose. In opposition, it is a legitimate question to ask the government whether it should be more attentive Mr. Randy White (Langley—Abbotsford, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, to the wealthier element in our society, that is senior public I wonder how long the good people of British Columbia are going servants. I have nothing against them, but the salary increases to put up with this Liberal government. given federal government deputy ministers are worth a look. When you put those figures before people who have a hard time surviv- Since we got elected in 1993 a lot of things have happened in ing, it is not much of a balance sheet. British Columbia. For instance, we lost our harbours police and we lost two military bases in British Columbia thanks to this Liberal I hope we will have the support of all of the members in government. opposition in support of this measure, which at least sends a signal to parliament. It is possible to listen to those who are the most Our B.C. RCMP has been reduced to a 9 to 5 police force thanks disadvantaged. to the cutbacks in the operation budget by the Liberal government. 9390 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

S. O. 31 Our B.C. fishing industry has been torn apart by the Liberal This is good news, something the Liberal government is doing to government. B.C. land claim issues have been a mystery to most of encourage partners in the eastern Quebec region and thus develop our residents and the beleaguered taxpayer is still picking up the shipping expertise with a future. bill. We have a major drug problem and this government does not even have a decent national drug strategy. * * * I ask all members in this House and I ask the people of British [English] Columbia, just what is it over here that this government intends to do with British Columbia? GOVERNMENT OF CANADA Mr. Chuck Strahl (Fraser Valley, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, the horse * * * race for the most outrageous action of the Liberal government has D (1400) begun, and they are off. The first one to the gate is the finance minister stumbling rather KIDS FROM THE VALLEY badly while carrying the extra load of high taxes, user fees and Mr. Hec Clouthier (Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, Lib.): several tons of debt. Coming up on the inside is the Minister of Mr. Speaker, it is with pride and pleasure that I announce a group of Public Works, trying to convince the world that the cost of repairs young step dancers from the great riding of Renfrew—Nipissing— to the House of Commons should not be included in the cost of Pembroke became world champions in Los Angeles on Saturday. repairs to House of Commons. Kids from the Valley won the gold medal at the World Champion- The Minister of Justice seems content to ride backwards on a ships of Performing Arts as well as the prestigious overall world beautiful Senate reform thoroughbred named Alberta while the championship trophy in the dance category. Prime Minister is hampered by his tendency to pepper spray Kids from the Valley are no strangers to the House. Last month everyone else in the race. they performed for all members of parliament at Kingsmere. Mr. As they reach the final turn it is the Prime Minister out in front, Speaker, as you well recall, you hosted the parliamentary barbeque running now with his own foot in his mouth while trying to and even danced with Kids from the Valley. Members from all castigate his chief of staff for getting him into the race to begin parties were united in emotion as they clapped or jigged with the with. The Minister of Public Works has wandered into the infield, kids. The member for Saint John showed she is really fast on her disqualified for firing a bureaucrat who pointed out the difference feet. between cost accounting and the minister’s colouring book, while The Kids from the Valley are Amy and Sarah Chapman, Krista the Minister of Justice is whipping Alberta and calling her a joke, and Steven Rosein, Katie Moyles and Kristin Carr. They are true which means Alberta will get even with her later. ambassadors of Canadian culture. As they come to the wire, the finance minister is making a [Translation] valiant effort but he is held back by extra EI premiums that are forcing him to use the whip on workers and businesses. They are truly Canada’s ambassadors. But, great scott, coming out of nowhere is the solicitor general * * * whispering loudly to everyone in sight while pretending to be invisible. The other participants are falling away. They are in awe REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT of his ability to remember, forget, deny and confirm, all at virtually the same time. The winner, hands down, is the solicitor general and Mr. Guy St-Julien (Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik, Lib.): the loser is the Canadian people. Mr. Speaker, there is more good news for the economy of eastern Quebec: the Government of Canada will be investing $11.3 million * * * over the next five years to launch Quebec’s first Technopole maritime, involving a dozen partners in the Lower St. Lawrence, STREET CENTS Gaspé and North Shore areas. Mr. Rey D. Pagtakhan (Winnipeg North—St. Paul, Lib.): Mr. This money, which is going to a region that has taken the Speaker, the television show Street Cents provides young people initiative in developing its economy, will be used to develop with the information they need to be smart consumers in the midst eastern Canada’s shipping expertise. Most of the money will go of aggressive marketing and advertising. This show is a valuable towards the direct funding of applied research projects, with the forum for young Canadians to assert themselves. emphasis on shipping. Since one of our greatest responsibilities as members of parlia- The program will be administered by Canada Economic Devel- ment is to nurture the assertive minds of our youth, it is therefore opment. It will encourage regional partners to join forces in my pleasure to note that today Street Cents is celebrating its 10th developing eastern Quebec’s shipping expertise. A study of the anniversary. Produced at CBC Halifax, this program has won feasibility of setting up a shipping biotechnology research centre in dozens of national and international awards, setting a positive eastern Quebec will be carried out. example of the quality programming that is created in Canada. October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9391

S. O. 31 Let us applaud the producers of Street Cents and hope this UNICEF television show will inspire more youth programming in the future, for the future of our country. Mrs. Rose-Marie Ur (Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, October is UNICEF Month.

* * * On October 24, 32 Cineplex theatres across Canada raised $40,000 from the sale of popcorn and drinks. This will help the [Translation] United Nations Children’s Fund protect the rights of children around the world.

NATIONAL BLOCK PARENT WEEK UNICEF day at the movies is one of the many fundraising initiatives culminating in the annual trick or treat for UNICEF Mr. Jacques Saada (Brossard—La Prairie, Lib.): Mr. Speak- campaign on October 31, when Canadian children carry the orange er, this week is National Block Parent Week. This year marks the and black collection boxes on Halloween night. Carrying these 30th anniversary of the block parent program in Canada. boxes is a Canadian tradition raising $4 million in Canada annual- ly. A little money goes a long way. Thirty five cents provides 15 Public safety is one of the government’s highest priorities. All vitamin A capsules to protect against blindness. Just $5 will supply Canadians want their communities to remain safe, and that is why school workbooks for 80 children. organizations like Block Parents of Canada exist. This Saturday help UNICEF continue its positive work around This organization deserves our recognition and support. The the world. volunteers who make up the program devote their time and energy to raising public awareness, ensuring the safety of their communi- * * * ties and, above all, protecting our children.

Whether involved in making schoolyards safer, reducing street MI’KMAQ crime, or decreasing the public’s fears of crime, this program is a concrete illustration of the importance Canadians attach to public Mr. Gordon Earle (Halifax West, NDP): Mr. Speaker, Mi’k- safety, a value this government shares. maq of Nova Scotia have achieved tremendous gains since the failure of the government’s disastrous centralization policies of the 1940s when over 1,000 Mi’kmaq were forcibly removed from their I am calling upon all Canadians to join us in honouring Block communities, loosing homes, farms, schools and churches in the Parents of Canada and its remarkable work in our communities. process.

* * * October is Mi’kmaq History Month. I am pleased to draw the attention of all Canadians to this event. I am honoured to offer tribute in the House of Commons to all the Mi’kmaq who worked D (1405 ) to maintain and develop Mi’kmaq traditions, education and culture.

[English] The time of the harvest is indeed the most fitting time to celebrate the ongoing contribution of Mi’kmaq, not only to their GORDON MOLENDYK own first nation but also to Nova Scotia as a whole and to all the Atlantic provinces. Part of the bounty reaped through Mi’kmaq Mr. Dick Harris (Prince George—Bulkley Valley, Ref.): Mr. efforts this year have been the tremendous gains in the area of Speaker, I would like to pay special tribute to a very special person Mi’kmaq education in Nova Scotia. in my riding who has just made been citizen of the year. My NDP colleagues and I salute Mi’kmaq’s struggles, achieve- ments and many victories. Constable Gordon Molendyk is a dedicated and hard working representative of the RCMP who is even better known for his countless and tireless community volunteer work. His volunteer * * * efforts play a large part in making my home town of Prince George a great place to live. His integrity and devotion to his work is an COMMUNITY FUTURES DEVELOPMENT example to all those who see and enjoy the benefits of our CORPORATIONS community and his dedication to our community every day. Mr. Brent St. Denis (Algoma—Manitoulin, Lib.): Mr. Speak- On behalf of all of my colleagues I wish to send my sincerest er, as we celebrate Small Business Week I rise today to remind the appreciation and congratulation to RCMP Constable Gordon Mo- House of the important work done by the many community futures lendyk for his many services to the people of Prince George in my development corporations throughout Canada, especially in my riding and to all of Canada. riding of Algoma—Manitoulin. 9392 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

S. O. 31 With the help of volunteer boards of directors the seven CFDCs Mr. Deveau was the fourth Acadian from Nova Scotia to be play a pivotal role in fostering local economic development. They admitted to the Order of Canada. I am proud to point out that all work with our communities, give local small business direct four are from my riding of West Nova. access to capital and good advice, and make available to them the services of the federal government. I have known Mr. Deveau for a long time, and have always admired his devotion to the Acadians of southeastern Nova Scotia. I wish to salute the Lacloche Manitoulin Business Development I, and countless other Acadians, have discovered the distinctive Corporation, the Waubetek Business Development Corporation, wealth of our heritage from the wonderful writings of this great the Community Development Corporation of Sault Ste. Marie and Canadian. area, the Community Development Corporation for East Algoma, the Nord-Aski Non-Profit Development Organization, and the In closing, my congratulations once again to Mr. Deveau for his Superior East and the Superior North Development Corporations induction into the Order of Canada, and my best wishes for the for their excellent service to our communities and entrepreneurs in future. my riding. * * * I ask all hon. members to join me in congratulating the fine work of all CFDCs throughout Canada. QUEBEC-JAPAN RELATIONS Mrs. Maud Debien (Laval East, BQ): Mr. Speaker, I take this * * * opportunity, as we are welcoming a delegation of parliamentarians from Japan, to point out that 1998 marks the 100th year of relations EPIDERMOLYSIS BULLOSA between Quebec and Japan

Ms. Sarmite Bulte (Parkdale—High Park, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, Indeed, it was 100 years ago that Sister Hélène Paradis, from the today I would like to raise awareness about EB. EB refers to Franciscaines Missionnaires de Marie community, took charge of a epidermolysis bullosa, a group of rare and devastating genetic hospital, in Kumamoto. Since then, Quebec religious communities diseases characterized by extremely fragile skin and recurrent have played a major role in the development of Japan’s education painful blisters. To date there is no cure for EB. and health system.

Despite the physical limitations that can be caused by EB there is After the second world war, the Quebec government was the first no impairment of intelligence. Many EB sufferers excel at work to borrow from Japanese financial institutions. Also, it was 25 and in the classroom. years ago that Quebec opened its general delegation in Tokyo. These 100 years of rapprochement between Quebec and Japan The Dystrophic Epidermolysis Bullosa Research Association of were marked this year, in Montreal and in Tokyo, by a number of Canada, also known as DEBRA, is seeking to develop a national activities. Let me take this opportunity to welcome our honourable registry of EB sufferers, raise awareness of the disease and guests from the land of the rising sun. encourage Canadian research into EB. Many of the problems of EB sufferers can be overcome with the support of a well informed and caring community. * * * [English] For this reason I seek to bring attention to EB and encourage research and efforts to care for those who suffer from this devastating disease. CANADIAN FORCES Mr. John Maloney (Erie—Lincoln, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the * * * message is clear. Sexual harassment will not be tolerated, especial- ly among the ranks of the Canadian Armed Forces. Chief of D (1410) Defence Staff General Baril recently stated that harassment is particularly appalling when it occurs in our military. [Translation] In a system where chivalry, honour, protection of the weakest and respect for all should be guiding principles, General Baril is J. ALPHONSE DEVEAU demanding a higher standard of conduct for members in uniform, as are Canadians, as am I. There are no excuses for this unaccept- Mr. Mark Muise (West Nova, PC): Mr. Speaker, last Thursday, able behaviour, and those who do not comply can expect to pay the J. Alphonse Deveau of Rivière au Saumon, a great historian, author price. and researcher, was inducted into the Order of Canada by the governor general. He was the recipient of this honour in recogni- I commend the military for taking a hard line against sexual tion of his great contribution as a witness to Acadian culture and harassment. It will help to eradicate such inappropriate conduct in history. the Canadian forces as well as send a clear and unequivocal October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9393

Oral Questions statement to society that sexual harassment and sexual misconduct ORAL QUESTION PERIOD in any form are intolerable.

D * * * (1415) [English] EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE QUEBEC ELECTION Mr. Monte Solberg (Medicine Hat, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, what to do with the $7 billion EI surplus is a question of fundamental Mr. Preston Manning (Leader of the Opposition, Ref.): Mr. fairness that every Canadian understands. Speaker, over the weekend the Prime Minister fired the first shot in the Quebec election, but unfortunately he shot at his own foot. The finance minister says he wants to debate the issue but the fact is that the money is not his to spend. It belongs to the workers By saying that Quebec’s demands have already been filled and and employers who were forced to pay an extra $7 billion into the that the Constitution is not a general store the Prime Minister gave plan because they have been overcharged for their EI premiums. the impression that Canadian federalism is not open to change.

It means the average worker is asked to pay $350 too much into Why on earth would the Prime Minister make such remarks on this fund every year. It means the employer who hired him pays the eve of the Quebec election? $500 too much into this fund every year. It means that the finance minister skims billions of extra taxes from the pockets of those Hon. Stéphane Dion (President of the Queen’s Privy Council least able to afford it. for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the list of changes in the last years is quite impressive If the minister chooses fairness he will give this money back to and it is certainly the will of the Prime Minister and the govern- the people it belongs to. If he chooses political expediency he will ment to go ahead and improve this federation for the good of the confiscate the money to get around the law and pad his political federation of Canadians, including Quebeckers. slush fund. I hope he chooses fairness. Look at the list. I will indicate some changes that have been made during the last years. For instance, the use of federal * * * spending powers, and the reduced conditions of the main federal transfers to the provinces with the creation of the CHST. The list is [Translation] long.

Mr. Preston Manning (Leader of the Opposition, Ref.): Mr. FONDS DE SOLIDARITÉ DES TRAVAILLEURS DU Speaker, the changes that are impressive to Quebec are demands QUÉBEC for change outside Quebec.

Mr. Odina Desrochers (Lotbinière, BQ): Mr. Speaker, the The Calgary declaration, the premiers’ proposals for improving Fonds de solidarité des travailleurs du Québec is celebrating its the social union, the official opposition’s new Canada act and the 15th anniversary. Alberta Senate election all represent healthy demands from outside Quebec to change the federation. Born out of the economic crisis of the early eighties, this workers’ fund has become, like Quebec’s Caisse de dépôt et By telling Quebeckers that reform of the federation is not an placement, and the General Investment Corporation of Quebec, one option, is the Prime Minister slamming the door on all of these of the finest examples of Quebec’s specificity, and one of the major other initiatives for change? venture capital corporations in Canada. Hon. Stéphane Dion (President of the Queen’s Privy Council With assets of $2.5 billion, the Fonds de solidarité has helped for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Lib.): create, protect or maintain over 56,000 jobs in Quebec. The fund is Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister never said that reform of the also a vast network of 16 regional funds and 85 local investment federation is not an option. corporations dedicated to promoting employment and regional development. We are improving the federation again and again, and we are still waiting for constructive solutions from the Reform Party. At a time when some are talking about dismantling our collec- tive development tools that were acquired after a great struggle, the Mr. Preston Manning (Leader of the Opposition, Ref.): Mr. Bloc Quebecois salutes the major achievements of the Fonds de Speaker, the impression the Prime Minister gave by his remarks solidarité and wishes it a long life. over the weekend was that the federation is not open to change. 9394 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Oral Questions What the Prime Minister should be telling Quebeckers is that When is the government going to shut down this sham and call there is a positive demand for change outside Quebec and that for a full investigation, a judicial inquiry to look into the Prime Quebeckers do not have to decide between the status quo and Minister’s role in the APEC scandal? sovereignty. Hon. Andy Scott (Solicitor General of Canada, Lib.): Mr. Will the minister help the Prime Minister to get his foot out of Speaker, as I said, the Public Complaints Commission is the master his mouth and tell Quebeckers today that reform of the federation is of its own procedure. a viable option for the future? D (1420 ) Hon. Stéphane Dion (President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Lib.): Allegations were made. The public complaints commission is Mr. Speaker, what is a good option is certainly the improvement of the appropriate organization or agency in which to take action. the federation. They did and it referred the matter to the federal court and that is where we stand. The federation has been improved by this government, especial- ly during the last years, as never in the past. I have cited federal * * * spending powers. There has also been quite an improvement in many files like mining, forest development, tourism, social hous- [Translation] ing, job training agreements, the national child benefit system, environmental and health programs, the constitutional amendment THE CONSTITUTION for Quebec— Mr. Gilles Duceppe (Laurier—Sainte-Marie, BQ): Mr. The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): The hon. member for Speaker, over the weekend, the Prime Minister boasted that all of Edmonton North. Quebec’s traditional demands had been satisfied. Yet, as far as we know, none of the governments that have * * * succeeded each other in Quebec since 1982, none of the major provincial political parties, none of our leaders, whether federalist APEC INQUIRY or sovereignist, think that Quebec should sign the 1982 Constitu- tion. Miss Deborah Grey (Edmonton North, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, on Saturday the Prime Minister told La Presse how he really feels If indeed it is ‘‘Mission accomplished’’, as the Prime Minister about APEC and I quote: said, can the Deputy Prime Minister explain how come not one of the governments, parties, leaders and— This is a marginal issue. If you want to know my opinion as to whether this is a big problem, BAH! This is a marginal problem. I knew the police could do their job and the police did its job. If they went too far, people will see. They think Carle The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): The hon. Minister for spoke to police and it’s possible that he did. I hope he did. I don’t know. Jean Carle Intergovernmental Affairs. will testify. Nobody was hurt and police even offered towels to the protesters to wipe their eyes. I can’t testify because they didn’t ask me to testify. Hon. Stéphane Dion (President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Lib.): Could someone over there please tell us what in the world this Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada is totally committed to means? continuing to improve our federation, in partnership with the provinces and with the deepest respect for their jurisdictions and Hon. Andy Scott (Solicitor General of Canada, Lib.): Mr. priorities. Speaker, what this means is that there is a process in place, the Public Complaints Commission. In fact, my recently appointed counterpart in Quebec recently bragged about how much this federation had improved these past That process was designed by parliament in 1988 to deal with few years. matters such as this incident and that is exactly what it is doing. It would be even better if Quebec was led by a government that Miss Deborah Grey (Edmonton North, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, the believes in Canada instead of one bent on breaking it up. solicitor general knows now that the process has been blown out of the water. Mr. Gilles Duceppe (Laurier—Sainte-Marie, BQ): Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out to the minister that the agree- The federal court is looking into Gerald Morin’s case right now ments on immigration, manpower and school boards were entered and his comments at a casino, which is more than it is doing for the into with sovereignist governments, because these governments are solicitor general. dedicated to looking after the interest of Quebec. They were not mere puppets. This whole commission has been tainted. The students and the RCMP say that they no longer trust the process. The Prime How can the minister explain the Prime Minister’s ‘‘mission Minister and the solicitor general seem to be the only ones who are accomplished’’ statement, when not one single political leader in pleased about this. Again we say ‘‘bah’’. Quebec—not Lucien Bouchard, Mario Dumont or Jean Charest—is October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9395

Oral Questions prepared to sign the 1982 Constitution? If everything is so rosy, delayed the proceedings. It has attacked the chair of the public why are they not signing? complaints panel. Now it has filed five exemption certificates to suppress relevant documentary evidence. Hon. Stéphane Dion (President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Lib.): We got into this mess in the first place to save embarrassment to Mr. Speaker, Quebeckers who want to improve the Canadian an Indonesian dictator. Is this latest tactic not just to save embar- federation, including its Constitution, would do well to vote for the rassment to a Canadian prime minister? Is that not the real truth? Liberals and Jean Charest, and certainly not for Lucien Bouchard and the Parti Quebecois, who have no desire to improve this Hon. Andy Scott (Solicitor General of Canada, Lib.): Mr. federation. Their only desire is to break it up. Speaker, as I have said many times, in 1988 this place, parliament, decided how we would choose in this country to deal with Mr. Pierre Brien (Témiscamingue, BQ): Mr. Speaker, in complaints by Canadian citizens against the RCMP. Once that addition to telling us that he had met all Quebec’s traditional process is commenced by a complainant it is the master of its own demands, the Prime Minister told us that his ministers would be procedure. giving the Liberal Party of Quebec a hand during the upcoming D election. (1425 ) When the federal ministers are campaigning for Jean Charest in Anything that we might do to affect that outcome would be Quebec, will they be telling voters that all Quebec’s traditional completely inappropriate. It would be inexcusable and we will not demands have now been met? do it. Hon. Stéphane Dion (President of the Queen’s Privy Council Ms. Alexa McDonough (Halifax, NDP): Mr. Speaker, the for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Lib.): solicitor general has made my point exactly. If we cannot get the Mr. Speaker, the Premier of Quebec, the leader of the Parti documents we cannot get the truth. Quebecois, said on the weekend that we had better watch out for a Why is the government forcing the students who have been freeze. denied legal funding to go to court to try to pry the government’s The only freeze we are watching out for, apart from the usual veil of secrecy off? When so many of the documents relating to winter one soon to begin, is the four-year freeze on referendums Suharto are suppressed, how can anyone believe that this govern- that would set in if his government were re-elected. ment wants to get to the truth of the matter? Mr. Pierre Brien (Témiscamingue, BQ): Mr. Speaker, my Hon. Andy Scott (Solicitor General of Canada, Lib.): Mr. supplementary is for the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. Speaker, counsel to the commission has been provided all the documents that have been requested. When he is out canvassing, will the minister be offering people an explanation of the position taken by his leader, the Prime * * * Minister, who says that everything has been sorted out, or the position of their protégé, Jean Charest, who says it has not? Which EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE position will he be explaining to voters? Mrs. Elsie Wayne (Saint John, PC): Mr. Speaker, this govern- Hon. Stéphane Dion (President of the Queen’s Privy Council ment appears to be gouging Canadian workers and employers for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Lib.): through excessive EI taxes. Combined CPP and EI premiums under Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister never said that everything has this government have brought payroll taxes to their highest level in been sorted out. The Prime Minister wants to move forward and history. The current EI act allows premiums to come down improve the federation. significantly. We are pleased to note, I might add, that the provincial Liberal Is the government planning to introduce legislation to block the Party leader’s goals are the same as ours. He wants to improve the EI premium cut required under the current law? federation and bring about a better social and economic union. In co-operation with other Canadians, we Quebeckers have built a Hon. Paul Martin (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, country that is the envy of the world and we will continue to our payroll taxes in this country are substantially below the OECD improve it. average. They are below the United States. In fact, each and every year since we have taken office we have * * * reduced EI premiums. We reduced those premiums by $1.5 billion in the last mandate. [English] I must say that in the last three years of the Tory regime each and APEC INQUIRY every year those premiums went up. Ms. Alexa McDonough (Halifax, NDP): Mr. Speaker, the Mrs. Elsie Wayne (Saint John, PC): Mr. Speaker, the minister government continues to stonewall the APEC inquiry. It has knows very well that the previous government froze EI premiums 9396 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Oral Questions at $3 for 1993 and that it was under his government that they rose The solicitor general does not know what is going on. My to $3.07. The minister may want to hide behind his selective question again is: When are we going to get to an independent memory, but he cannot run away from the fact that he and his judicial inquiry? government are trying to play fast and loose with billions of dollars that belong to Canadian workers and employers. D (1430)

When will the minister do the right thing and cut EI premiums to Hon. Andy Scott (Solicitor General of Canada, Lib.): Mr. $2 so Canadian workers can put the money in their pockets and Speaker, the member is absolutely wrong. The complainants have employers can take that money and create more jobs for our access to challenge the decision of the counsel to the commission, people? and the counsel to the commission is doing his job by showing them how to do that according to the rules of the public complaints Hon. Paul Martin (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, commission. That is how it is done. when we took office the intention of the previous government, had they won the election, was that the premiums were going to go to $3.30 and we did not let that happen. Not only that, but when the * * * previous government took office those premiums were around $2. When they left office they were going to $3.30. The only issue is, [Translation] when will the Tories get their research right? FEDERAL SPENDING POWER * * * Mr. Yvan Loubier (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, BQ): Mr. Speak- er, on the weekend, the Prime Minister said that, in constitutional APEC INQUIRY terms, and in other terms, he had settled the question of Quebec.

Mr. Jim Abbott (Kootenay—Columbia, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, When he canvases the electorate in the next election, how will the solicitor general has just made a statement to this House that is the Minister of Finance explain to Quebeckers that one of Quebec’s simply untrue. Chris Considine— main historical demands—the limitation of federal spending power in areas of provincial jurisdiction—has not been resolved at all and Some hon. members: Oh, oh. that the federal government continues to invade Quebec’s jurisdic- tions? The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): I would ask the hon. member for Kootenay—Columbia to withdraw that assertion. Hon. Stéphane Dion (President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Lib.): Mr. Jim Abbott: Mr. Speaker, out of respect for the Chair, I Mr. Speaker, the fact is that federal spending power exists in all withdraw that statement. federations around the world and that, in Canada, it is used the least and is accompanied by fewer conditions. Chris Considine, the APEC commission lawyer, does not have the authority to demand the censored documents from the RCMP or Nevertheless, in the 1996 throne speech, the Government of from the Prime Minister’s office. The solicitor general knows that. Canada limited federal spending even further than what was Yet he just stood in this House and said that all the documents they provided in the Meech Lake accord, which was approved by the wanted were available. That statement was incorrect. Bourassa government and by a certain federal minister of the time, Lucien Bouchard. When is this government going to get to the truth through an independent judicial inquiry? Mr. Yvan Loubier (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, BQ): Mr. Speak- er, the minister should have added ‘‘and whose demise was partly Hon. Andy Scott (Solicitor General of Canada, Lib.): Mr. the responsibility of the Prime Minister of Canada’’. Speaker, it is quite the contrary. Counsel to the commission has access to the information. Counsel to the commission has never On the subject of canvassing, how will the Minister of Finance expressed any problem with the availability of the information that explain to Quebeckers that he is continuing to refuse to compensate has been requested. It is that simple. Quebec in the amount of $2 billion for the cost of harmonizing the GST with the QST, an amount even Jean Charest is calling for? Mr. Jim Abbott (Kootenay—Columbia, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, if that is the case, perhaps the solicitor general can explain to Hon. Paul Martin (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, Canadians why it is that counsel has had to go to some of the when they go from door to door, the Liberal candidates will be able students—the students that the Liberals denied funding for lawyers to say that, between 1993 and 1998, the federal government for—and he is counselling the students so they can help commis- transferred to Quebec only $2.1 billion in tax points, increased sion counsel get these documents. equalization payments by $1 billion, gave out $200 million in tax October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9397

Oral Questions benefits for children and provided nearly $650 million for the tion, to build a plan that will create real change on behalf of infrastructure program. aboriginal people.

* * * * * *

[English] [Translation]

HEALTH CARE ABORIGINAL AFFAIRS Mrs. Pauline Picard (Drummond, BQ): Mr. Speaker, out of Mr. Derrek Konrad (Prince Albert, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, on solidarity with his Cabinet colleagues and the Prime Minister, the Saturday morning Canadians were appalled to read in the Globe Minister of Health will have to support Jean Charest and the and Mail about conditions on the Hobbema reserve. While some Liberal Party at the next election in Quebec. children on the reserve sleep on filthy mattresses in the basements of burned out houses, their jet set leaders are living in luxury both What does the Minister of Health have to say to Quebeckers in at home and abroad. response to Jean Charest, who said ‘‘Forget Lucien Bouchard, forget Jean Rochon. The one really responsible for health cuts is The official opposition together with band members has been the Prime Minister of Canada’’? calling for a forensic audit into the band’s finances for the last year but the minister has refused. D (1435)

Why is the money not getting to those who really need it? Hon. Allan Rock (Minister of Health, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, we increased transfers. Last year, we increased them by $1.5 billion, Hon. Jane Stewart (Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern and we have already said that health is a key priority for this Development, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the pictures that members may government. We intend, when we are in a position to do so, to have seen on the weekend are what I am confronted with on a daily reinvest in health, in partnership with the provinces. basis as Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development. Mrs. Pauline Picard (Drummond, BQ): Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health said he would fight the policies of Ontario’s These are real people with real problems and they demand real Premier Mike Harris. change. I am glad for this question and look forward to others which will give us the opportunity to discuss the complex relation- How will he justify his support for Jean Charest, whose policies ship that exists between aboriginal people and the Government of largely mirror those of Mike Harris? Canada, which allow us to explore past approaches which have not worked in making change for aboriginal peoples, and to share with Hon. Allan Rock (Minister of Health, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, we this House the real approach that will make sustainable change on have our own policies. Based on these policies, health is a key behalf of aboriginal people that this government has presented. priority, and we intend to reinvest in that sector soon. Mr. Derrek Konrad (Prince Albert, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, even while we speak some children on the Hobbema reserve in Alberta * * * are living in conditions that would appall an experienced foreign [English] aid worker. Their parents are among the 80% of residents living on welfare on what should be one of the wealthiest reserves in this country. AGRICULTURE Mr. Jake E. Hoeppner (Portage—Lisgar, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, I again ask the minister why is the money not getting to those in 1996 a Lethbridge farmer was sentenced to a $4,000 fine or six who really need it. Where is the forensic audit that we and months in jail for taking $5 worth of wheat across the border. grassroots natives have been calling for? Today 29 farmers are going to court in Regina for doing nothing Hon. Jane Stewart (Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern more than exporting their own grain. They did not want to sell it to Development, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I am glad that the opposition Ottawa’s wheat board. Now they are faced with going to jail. has finally come to its senses and has realized that the circum- stances on reserves are difficult and do need the support of all of us. Why is the justice minister seeking such cruel punishment for nothing more than a farmer selling his own grain? For far too long the solutions have been have the federal government come to the rescue, have the federal government fix Hon. Ralph E. Goodale (Minister of Natural Resources and the problems. We tried that at the turn of the century and it has not Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board, Lib.): Mr. worked. Our approach now is to work in partnership with first Speaker, there are rules, regulations and laws applicable in every nations, my goodness perhaps even with members of the opposi- jurisdiction in this country and in the world. It is incumbent on all 9398 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Oral Questions of us who respect democracy and the rule of law to follow those Bloc Quebecois and the PQ are trying to pick a fight, and rules and regulations. Quebeckers have had enough.

It is the responsibility of government, no matter how difficult it may be in some circumstances, to make sure that those laws are * * * applied impartially in all circumstances, and that is what is [English] happening in this case. Obviously this government will not com- ment on any case before the courts. AGRICULTURE Mr. Jake E. Hoeppner (Portage—Lisgar, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, I am sure glad and assured that the minister looks after the law. The Mr. Murray Calder (Dufferin—Peel—Wellington—Grey, judge who handed out the cruel sentence to this Lethbridge farmer Lib.): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the minister of agriculture. has a son who was convicted of robbing a casino at knife point in 1996. He received nothing but a suspended sentence. Over the weekend I had a chance to talk with five farmers in my riding about low commodity prices. What I would like to know and A knife wielding robber gets a suspended sentence but the what they would like to know, concerning the suffering it is causing robber’s father hands out a huge fine or a jail term to a farmer for in rural Canada today, is whether the minister is aware of it. What selling— does he plan to do to address this problem?

The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): The hon. Minister of Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Natural Resources and Minister responsible for the Canadian Lib.): Mr. Speaker, we certainly are aware of the unfortunate Wheat Board. circumstances that low commodity prices in the world are bringing to many of our Canadian farmers. Hon. Ralph E. Goodale (Minister of Natural Resources and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board, Lib.): Mr. I remind everyone that we already have one of the best safety net Speaker, I have absolutely no knowledge whatsoever of the allega- systems in the world. For example, it has $2.5 billion in the NISA tions made by the hon. member. accounts. We are making arrangements so that farmers can draw on that earlier if they need it. I am sure these are allegations the Minister of Justice would like to inquire into in terms of the integrity of the Canadian judiciary. In addition, last week I called a meeting for November 4 of the key farm leaders in Canada and the provincial governments so that we could talk about the realities of today, how we will discuss those * * * and how we will approach improving the situation for Canadian farmers. [Translation]

MILLENNIUM SCHOLARSHIPS * * *

Mr. Bernard Bigras (Rosemont, BQ): Mr. Speaker, the Prime GASOLINE Minister contends that all is settled with respect to the federal government’s spending power and Quebec’s right to opt out. Mr. Jason Kenney (Calgary Southeast, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, the other day the Minister of the Environment announced with glee a But this is the Prime Minister who wants to celebrate the new new tax on gas. She said it would cost Canadian consumers only millennium by infringing upon Quebec’s jurisdiction over educa- about a cent a litre. However, a Liberal member, the member for tion, with his millennium scholarships. Pickering—Ajax, the respected chairman of the Liberal caucus on gas pricing, said it would cost as much as 15 cents a litre. When he goes door to door, how will the Minister of Human Resources Development justify this new interference in education Who is right, the minister who says it is a cent a litre or the with the millennium scholarships, which no one in Quebec wants? Liberal member who says it is 15 cents a litre? Which one should we believe? D (1440) Hon. Christine Stewart (Minister of the Environment, Lib.): Hon. Stéphane Dion (President of the Queen’s Privy Council Mr. Speaker, I was very pleased to have the opportunity Friday to for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Lib.): announce new regulations for the reduction of sulphur in gasoline. Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding that the Quebec National Assembly unanimously approved an approach to the millennium The decision was taken as a result of a study done by the federal scholarships. The Prime Minister of Canada wrote the premier of government, provinces and territories working together with the oil Quebec a letter, saying it was a good approach. The millennium refinery industries, the automobile manufacturers and other stake- scholarships are no longer a contentious issue, except when the holders. They all agreed that the cost would be $1.8 billion to October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9399

Oral Questions reduce it to the levels I have regulated. However, the costs of not we have agreed to provide direct funding to a major meeting of the acting are many times higher in terms of health. East Timor network dialogue group which brings together all parties to the dispute to find a resolution. This translates in terms of cost to the oil refiners of one cent per litre, according to the report of this committee. * * *

Mr. Jason Kenney (Calgary Southeast, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, we D can mark that down as another Liberal evasion to a straight (1445) question. Let me try again with this minister. TAXATION I asked her who was right, the member or she. Industry experts say it will be a lot more than a cent a litre but my question is we Mr. Nelson Riis (Kamloops, Thompson and Highland Val- have a respected Liberal member here saying it will be 15 cents a leys, NDP): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of litre, so who is right? Is the minister saying that Liberal member is Finance who will soon be known as the Grinch who stole Christ- wrong, yes or no? mas.

Hon. Christine Stewart (Minister of the Environment, Lib.): Canadians last week were shocked to find that the government Mr. Speaker, I have based my regulations on a study that, as I has now decided to tax fun by taxing things like Christmas parties. indicated, involved different levels of government, the oil produc- The cost of a Christmas party is now to be a taxable benefit. ers, the refiners and the automobile manufacturers. Will the Minister of Finance simply stand and say, no, the government is not that badly off that it is going to start taxing fun, They presented a report which indicated very specifically what Christmas parties, Hallowe’en parties and the like? the costs would be. In fact, health people in this country indicate that the health costs of not acting are much higher than estimated in Hon. Harbance Singh Dhaliwal (Minister of National Reve- that report. nue, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member because sitting between the solicitor general and the human resources * * * minister, I feel like the Maytag repairman. Let me say that it is not true what the hon. member has said. In EAST TIMOR fact we only recognize a tax benefit if it is over $100, any gifts over $100. I do not know about the hon. member, but I do not get invited Mr. Svend J. Robinson (Burnaby—Douglas, NDP): Mr. to many Christmas parties where the cost is more than $100. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Foreign Affairs. This Perhaps he gets invited to some rich parties. The limit is $100. morning the minister met with the Timorese leader and Nobel prize Only when it is over $100 does it become taxable. winner José Ramos-Horta who has urged our government to support the right of the people of East Timor to self-determination * * * and an internationally supervised referendum. [Translation] Will the minister honour the promise his party made in 1991 or will he continue to attack the East Timor alert network, to THE CONSTITUTION apologize for Canadian protesters and to put embarrassment to Indonesian dictators ahead of the rights of the people of East Mr. André Bachand (Richmond—Arthabaska, PC): Mr. Timor? Speaker, there is a desire for change, for renewed federalism, not only in Quebec but in all the rest of the country as well. Will he now support East Timor’s right to self-determination, yes or no? The only one who seems not to share that desire is the man who should spend less time patting himself on the back and more time Hon. Lloyd Axworthy (Minister of Foreign Affairs, Lib.): Mr. doing his job, our famous Machiavelli of Canadian politics, the Speaker, I would like to report to the House that we had a very Prime Minister of Canada. Divide and conquer, that is what the useful discussion with José Ramos-Horta this morning during government’s constitutional strategy is, in a nutshell. which he expressed appreciation for the strong interest the Cana- dian government has taken in supporting initiatives in East Timor. With all the statements the Prime Minister has made, does the Liberal government not realize he is giving the kiss of death to the I indicated to him that we are strongly supportive of the UN leader of the federalist forces in Quebec? sponsored process of negotiations going on. In fact, I met with Portuguese officials on the weekend to discuss this and we also Hon. Stéphane Dion (President of the Queen’s Privy Council indicated that we believe there has to be a full involvement of East for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Lib.): Timorese people in whatever arrangements are made. To that end, Mr. Speaker, I would be only too pleased at any time to compare on 9400 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Oral Questions the record of the Mulroney years to this government’s record on part of the International Year of Older Persons. These changes will enhancing the federation. permit over one million seniors to renew their benefits automati- cally. No more will pensioners have to rush to complete unneces- The method the Prime Minister wanted to use is a step-by-step sary paperwork or worry about having their payments interrupted. one, solving one aspect at a time, rather than coming up with a huge This is the best improvement to the GIS-SPA program in 31 years. change all at one time. That does not work, and does nothing to promote the evolution of the federation. * * * I believe the Prime Minister’s approach has worked well in [Translation] recent years, and we will continue with it, advancing the federation in conjunction with the provinces, respecting their jurisdictions and THE CONSTITUTION priorities. Mr. Rahim Jaffer (Edmonton—Strathcona, Ref.): Mr. Speak- Mr. André Bachand (Richmond—Arthabaska, PC): Mr. er, Canadians throughout the country have expressed a desire to see Speaker, the Prime Minister considers himself the leader who has the federation run differently. done the most for the constitution. The most, yes, but the most We had the Calgary declaration and the premiers’ social union damage. proposal, which even met with Lucien Bouchard’s approval. When it comes down to it, the best ally the Quebec sovereignists On the eve of the Quebec election, why is the Prime Minister and Lucien Bouchard have in Quebec is the Prime Minister himself refusing to recognize Canadians’ desire for change? and his gang. D (1450) With the attitude the Prime Minister and his troops have toward constitutional matters, I have a suggestion to make: the true Hon. Stéphane Dion (President of the Queen’s Privy Council federalist forces in the country have a clear, cut and dried strategy for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Lib.): to suggest to the Prime Minister, the Minister of Intergovernmental Mr. Speaker, the government wholeheartedly supports the Calgary Affairs and the Liberal government. Shhh, keep absolutely quiet declaration. for the next 36 days. Not a word. We are negotiating the social union with the provinces and I Some hon. members: Hear, hear. repeat that we will be more successful in our efforts to do so if we have a government in Quebec that believes in Canada, that wants to Hon. Stéphane Dion (President of the Queen’s Privy Council improve it, and that will share with other Canadians all the for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Lib.): expertise, all the knowledge, all the culture of Quebec, which is a Mr. Speaker, the responsibility of the Government of Canada is to culture of trust, not the culture of mistrust the Bloc Quebecois is govern, and govern it does, for all Canadians, including Quebeck- trying to impose on us. ers. * * * From what I can see, the Liberals do not seem to be the ones who are the allies of the Bloc Quebecois. They are not the ones clapping YOUNG OFFENDERS ACT at the moment. Mr. Michel Bellehumeur (Berthier—Montcalm, BQ): Mr. Speaker, there is another consensus in Quebec that the federal * * * government is refusing to respect, and that is the consensus around young offenders. [English] The approach the Minister of Justice has taken in her bill is PENSIONS completely at odds with the current approach in Quebec.

Mr. Larry McCormick (Hastings—Frontenac—Lennox and How can the Prime Minister claim to have sorted out the issue of Addington, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the well-being of nearly one and a Quebec’s distinct character when his justice minister is getting half million Canadian pensioners depends on them applying every ready to impose Canada’s young offenders model on Quebec? year for the guaranteed annual income. Since next year is the [English] International Year of Older Persons, what can the Minister of Human Resources Development do to make it easier for Canadian Hon. Anne McLellan (Minister of Justice and Attorney pensioners to get the income support they need? General of Canada, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, in fact that which we are proposing, as opposed to being in contradiction to that which Hon. Pierre S. Pettigrew (Minister of Human Resources Quebec does, our strategy builds on much of that which the Development, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, as a matter of fact we are province of Quebec has pursued. Indeed, let me say the hallmark of making major service improvements in 1999 to the renewal of the young offenders strategy is flexibility, because in this federa- guaranteed income supplement and spousal allowance benefits as tion we as a federal government believe it is important to provide October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9401

Oral Questions the provinces with the opportunity to pursue their own individual I understand that the minister sets immigration targets each year agendas in key areas. in order to meet the needs of the Canadian population. For 1998 why is the department not expected to meet the immigration * * * targets? Mr. Andrew Telegdi (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of JUSTICE Citizenship and Immigration, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the projected number of immigrants each year is a planning target. These targets Mr. Peter Mancini (Sydney—Victoria, NDP): Mr. Speaker, the are established for the different categories. The department has President of the United States has publicly decried the recent been successful in meeting the targets for the refugee category and murder of an American doctor. He said that the United States will the family class category, satisfying our very important commit- not tolerate violence directed at those providing legally protected ment to both humanitarian assistance and family reunification. medical services. Unfortunately due to events beyond our control, notably the civil Our Prime Minister has said nothing. Three doctors providing economic crisis in Asia, we are experiencing a decline in the legal abortions for women in Canada have been shot in the past skilled worker category. We expect to meet the target— four years. Why has the Prime Minister not spoken out? The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): The hon. member for Will the government announce additional support for the task Medicine Hat. force investigating the shooting?

Hon. Anne McLellan (Minister of Justice and Attorney * * * General of Canada, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the hon. member raises a very important and a very serious question. ABORIGINAL AFFAIRS

The government is committed to working with law enforcement Mr. Monte Solberg (Medicine Hat, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, for five officials in the United States. In fact this morning I instructed my years the Reform Party has been asking questions about third world department to do whatever it can, including providing additional conditions on native reserves across this country. For five years we resources to work with officials in the United States to put a stop to have had nothing but stonewalling from Indian affairs ministers this kind of horrendous violence. across the way. They seem to be more interested in protecting entrenched interests than in really helping natives. * * * D (1455) AGRICULTURE If the minister really cares about natives, why in the world will Mr. Mark Muise (West Nova, PC): Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday of she not give us a forensic audit to ensure that money gets to natives last week members of the Nova Scotia legislature held a two hour on reserve? emergency debate to discuss the serious plight of our farmers who for the second consecutive year have suffered enormous financial Hon. Jane Stewart (Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern losses due to unusually dry conditions. Development, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, it is just the opposite I am afraid. For the last five years all I have heard coming from the Considering the devastation farmers have experienced with their Reform Party are things like ‘‘Why do we not just get rid of section crops over the past two years, will the Minister of Agriculture and 35 in the Constitution. Why do we not cut $900 million from the Agri-Food make a firm commitment here and now to provide our department of Indian affairs for the provision of services and farmers with emergency relief? programs for aboriginal people. Why do we not just pay aboriginal people a lump sum of money and tell them to go and build their Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, schools and roads’’. I do not hear those questions coming from the Lib.): Mr. Speaker, had the hon. member been listening, I just hon. member at all. answered that question a few minutes ago. I said that I am calling the ministers of agriculture in Nova Scotia and across the country * * * and farm leaders across the country to discuss that very issue on November 4. [Translation]

* * * THE CONSTITUTION

IMMIGRATION Mr. Daniel Turp (Beauharnois—Salaberry, BQ): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Foreign Affairs. The Prime Ms. Sophia Leung (Vancouver Kingsway, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, Minister claims that everything is settled. Yet, nothing is settled my question is for the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. regarding Quebec’s role on the international scene. 9402 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Oral Questions If everything is settled, how does the minister explain that, at ministry is responsible for a great number of the concerns. international meetings on culture, the Quebec Minister of Culture However, we will not renege on our responsibility to continue to is left behind and it is the Minister of Canadian Heritage who provide Canadians with one of the safest transportation systems in speaks on behalf of Anne Hébert, Gilles Vigneault and Robert the world. Lepage, and who defends Quebec’s culture, which the Prime Minister of Canada said did not exist? * * * Hon. Sheila Copps (Minister of Canadian Heritage, Lib.): [Translation] Mr. Speaker, we form such a partnership that, next week, a meeting will be held in Mont-Tremblant to deal with cultural issues, and I BILL C-44 personally invited Mrs. Beaudoin to take part in it. Mrs. Pierrette Venne (Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, BQ): Mr. Speaker, the President of the Treasury Board told the House, in * * * reference to Bill C-44, that the administrators of cultural organiza- [English] tions are appointed at the government’s pleasure. Does the minister mean that public organizations will be under HEALTH the government’s direction, under the yoke of the party in office and, ultimately, under the authority of a temperamental minister? Ms. Judy Wasylycia-Leis (Winnipeg North Centre, NDP): Mr. Speaker, private health care is a booming business in Canada. Hon. Marcel Massé (President of the Treasury Board and In this region alone, private health care businesses are on the rise Minister responsible for Infrastructure, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the for the second year in a row. This rise in private health care is a sure CBC’s independence is clearly guaranteed under section 46(5) of sign that this government’s deep cuts to transfer payments for the Broadcasting Act, which reads: ‘‘The Corporation shall, in the health care are creating two systems of health care in Canada, one pursuit of its objects and in the exercise of its powers, enjoy for the wealthy and one for everyone else. freedom of expression and journalistic, creative and programming independence’’. Will the health minister admit that health care cuts are leading us down the road to two tier American style health care? D (1500) Hon. Allan Rock (Minister of Health, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, over I think the government clearly indicated its desire to see the CBC a year ago this government announced that the era of cuts to health enjoy total cultural freedom. care was over. Last year one of the first things we did as we emerged from the deficit of the past was to reinvest in health care * * * by restoring $1.5 billion to the transfer payments. The commitment of this government to the public single funder system of health care [English] is unequivocal. That is why the Prime Minister has said clearly that health will be the subject of our next major reinvestment, and it TAXATION will be. Mr. Randy White (Langley—Abbotsford, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, I notice the Minister of National Revenue is to tax Canadians who * * * will be attending Christmas parties.

HIGHWAYS I have the Liberal caucus budget. It suggests that it is to spend $86,700, not including donations and gifts, at a Christmas party. I Mr. Mark Muise (West Nova, PC): Mr. Speaker, the only wonder if these Liberal MPs will be taxed or report that as a taxable unfinished stretch of Highway 101 in Nova Scotia is located in my income. riding between Digby and Weymouth. A heavy increase in com- mercial traffic has local residents fearing for their own safety and The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): As was quite rightly that of their children who must travel these dangerous roads by pointed out to me, that does not fall within the administrative school bus every day. responsibility of government. It is a caucus responsibility.

Can the Minister of Transport tell this House whether he and his * * * provincial counterparts have entered into any negotiations on a cost sharing agreement to complete this unfinished section of highway? CANADIAN COAST GUARD If so, when can we anticipate the completion of these negotiations? Mr. Peter Stoffer (Sackville—Eastern Shore, NDP): Mr. Mr. Stan Dromisky (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Speaker, last Tuesday in the Standing Committee of Fisheries and Transport, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the Department of Transport has Oceans, Mr. Turner, acting director for the coast guard, indicated done everything in its power to provide a safe, efficient and that in no way would there be $55 million worth of cuts to the coast sustainable transportation system. In this situation the provincial guards. October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9403

Routine Proceedings In Saturday’s Daily News, Neil Bellefontaine, regional director leaders and academics. The visit was held in Tokyo, Tohoku and for Atlantic Canada, said that they were close to reaching their Hokkaido from May 22 to June 2, 1998. goal of $45 million in cuts. Commander Turner also indicated that close to $200 million had been diverted from the coast guard into Second is the report of the ninth annual meeting between the DFO. What a wasteful move that was. Canada-Japan Interparliamentary Group and the Japan-Canada Parliamentarian Friendship League held in Banff, Calgary, Edmon- My question is for the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans. Are you ton and Fort McMurray from August 21 to August 28, 1998. or are you not going to privatize the coast guard in the very near future? Third is the report of the executive committee meeting of the Asia-Pacific Parliamentary Forum held in Lima, Peru, from Sep- The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): Before the minister tember 6 to September 8, 1998. responds, I would remind all members to address each other through the Chair. Interparliamentary associations provide forums at which parlia- mentarians are ambassadors for their countries. Members of the Hon. David Anderson (Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, Canada-Japan Interparliamentary Group have been able to address Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the question of the hon. member is whether we and promote issues such as the anti-personnel landmines conven- intend to privatize the coast guard. tion, cultural exchanges and trade matters. I can assure him that is not the intention of the government. I can [Translation] also assure him that we have made certain reductions in expendi- tures which are necessary. We wish to thank all those who supported us in our work. Nevertheless we have put safety, in particular search and rescue, * * * first. We will not have any reduction of safety levels because we regard that as our most critical role. [English] CRIMINAL CODE ______Mr. Dick Harris (Prince George—Bulkley Valley, Ref.) moved for leave to introduce Bill C-448, an act to amend the ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS Criminal Code (consecutive sentences). He said: Mr. Speaker, I am most pleased to introduce this private D (1505) member’s bill today to the House of Commons. I do it because [Translation] Canadians have been crying out for some serious changes to our justice system. One of the areas that they demand to be changed is GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO PETITIONS the area that deals with sentencing, in particular concurrent sen- tencing. Mr. Peter Adams (Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, This enactment would require that a court, when sentencing an pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in offender for the commission of any certain or specific violent both official languages, the government’s response to 19 petitions. offences against a person, shall direct that the sentence of impris- onment imposed be served consecutively to any sentence for * * * another such offence. I am pleased to introduce the bill today. I am certain that INTERPARLIAMENTARY DELEGATIONS members of the House will realize the importance of getting this Mrs. Yolande Thibeault (Saint-Lambert, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, change done. Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official lan- (Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed) guages, the report of a Canadian parliamentary delegation that travelled to Cameroon last June. * * * This is a particularly opportune moment, moreover, because we have the honour of receiving parliamentarians from Cameroon this PETITIONS week. RIGHTS OF GRANDPARENTS [English] Mr. Mac Harb (Ottawa Centre, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I have a Mr. John Maloney (Erie—Lincoln, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, pur- petition signed by many constituents in Ontario who are requesting suant to Standing Order 34, I have the pleasure of presenting, in that parliament amend the Divorce Act to include a provision, as both official languages, three reports of the Canada-Japan Interpar- supported in Bill C-340, regarding the right of a spouse’s parent, liamentary Group, namely the report of the third annual visit to the grandparent, to have access to or custody of the children or the Japan to meet with Diet members, business persons, community child. 9404 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Routine Proceedings MARRIAGE In this year marking the 50th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights the petitioners would like to draw to Mr. John Williams (St. Albert, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, I have the the attention of the House that Canada is an internationally honour to present three petitions today. recognized leader of promoting human rights around the world.

Whereas the majority of Canadians understand the concept of Whereas human rights abuses tragically continue in many marriage as only the voluntary union of a single unmarried male countries around the world, including countries such as Indonesia, and a single unmarried female and whereas it is the duty of the petitioners call upon Canada to appeal for action by leaders of parliament to ensure that marriage as it has always been known and countries where human rights are not being protected and to seek to understood in Canada be preserved and protected, the petitioners bring to justice those responsible for the violation of internation- pray that parliament enact legislation such as Bill C-225 so as to ally recognized universal human rights. define in statute that a marriage can only be entered into between a single male and a single female. PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICERS D (1510 ) Mr. Paul Szabo (Mississauga South, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the These three petitions are signed by many people in my constitu- second petition concerns police officers and firefighters. ency in and around St. Albert, Edmonton, and other areas. [Translation] The petitioners draw to the attention of the House that our police officers and firefighters are required to place their lives at risk on a daily basis as they discharge their duties and that when one of them BILL C-304 loses their life in the line of duty often the employment benefits are not sufficient to take care of their surviving families. Further, the Mr. Pierre de Savoye (Portneuf, BQ): Mr. Speaker, the signa- public mourns the loss of police officers and firefighters killed in tories of the petition I am tabling today are calling upon parliament the line of duty and wish to support those families in a tangible way to support Private Member’s Bill C-304, which would strengthen in their time of need. the protection in the Canadian Bills of Rights for property rights. The petitioners call upon parliament to establish a public safety [English] officers compensation fund for the benefit of families of public safety officers who are killed in the line of duty. FOOD AND DRUG ACT The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): We have quite a Mr. Svend J. Robinson (Burnaby—Douglas, NDP): Mr. number of petitions so I would ask hon. members to keep their Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition which is signed by prefaces brief. hundreds of residents of the constituency I have the honour of representing, Burnaby—Douglas. It notes that freedom of choice in MARRIAGE health care is becoming increasingly curtailed and further threat- ened by legislation and statutory regulations of the Government of Canada. Mr. Peter MacKay (Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, PC): Mr. Speaker, on behalf of 32 constituents of Pictou—Anti- The petitioners urge that Canada’s Food and Drug Act be revised gonish—Guysborough and pursuant to Standing Order 36 I would in a number of ways, including that the definition of food include table a petition urging parliament to enact Bill C-225, an act to dietary supplements and food for special health uses, and that the amend the Marriage Act, which was introduced by a Liberal definition of drug be amended to read that drug includes any member very recently. substance other than food. They go on with a number of other proposed changes to the Food and Drug Act. [Translation]

Finally, they urge that only foods the Government of Canada may restrict from a market are those that are proven unsafe or ABOLITION OF SENATE fraudulently promoted and that in all cases the burden of proof shall be on the Government of Canada to establish that such foods Mr. Jean-Guy Chrétien (Frontenac—Mégantic, BQ): Mr. are either unsafe or fraudulently promoted. Speaker, I am pleased to table a petition organized by Albini Lafontaine in Frontenac, which is in my riding. HUMAN RIGHTS This petition calls for abolition of the Senate. This would mean Mr. Paul Szabo (Mississauga South, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I have an annual saving of $50 million, as well as making the operations two petitions to present today. The first deals with human rights. of parliament more democratic, and more efficient as well. October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9405

Routine Proceedings [English] to foul emission control devices and adversely affect engine performances, resulting in higher smog levels. MARRIAGE The petitioners call on parliament to set new national clean fuel standards for gasoline with zero MMT and lower sulphur content. Mr. Jim Pankiw (Saskatoon—Humboldt, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present two petitions today on behalf of the MULTILATERAL AGREEMENT ON INVESTMENT constituents of Saskatoon—Humboldt. The first petition is from residents who want to ensure that Mr. Nelson Riis (Kamloops, Thompson and Highland Val- marriage, as it has always been known and understood in Canada, leys, NDP): Mr. Speaker, it is my honour to present a petition is preserved and protected. The petitioners pray that parliament pursuant to Standing Order 36 signed by thousands of my constitu- enact Bill C-225 so as to define in statute that a marriage can only ents. They are concerned about the MAI and are not convinced that be entered into between a single male and a single female. the government is going to back off on this. It may have been sort of curtailed for the moment but they want to make it perfectly clear that they have 101 reasons for opposing the MAI, which I will not CRIMINAL CODE read.

Mr. Jim Pankiw (Saskatoon—Humboldt, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, CANADA PENSION PLAN the second petition draws the attention of the House to section 43 of the Criminal Code that recognizes the primary role of parents in the Mr. Nelson Riis (Kamloops, Thompson and Highland Val- raising and disciplining their children. leys, NDP): I present a second petition, Mr. Speaker, on behalf of a number of small business operators in central British Columbia The petitioners request parliament to affirm the duty of parents who are concerned about the massive increases in CPP premiums. to responsibly raise their children according to their own con- They support the principle of CPP but they want the government to science and beliefs and to retain section 43 of Canada’s Criminal acknowledge that this will create serious hardship in terms of one Code as it is currently worded. more type of payroll tax.

MULTILATERAL AGREEMENT ON INVESTMENT CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

Mr. John Solomon (Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, NDP): Mr. Nelson Riis (Kamloops, Thompson and Highland Val- Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to present a petition in the House of leys, NDP): I have a third petition, Mr. Speaker, on a totally Commons today on behalf of many of my constituents who do not different topic. These petitioners from Kamloops are concerned believe Don Johnston at the OECD with respect to the MAI. They about the lack of serious consideration for people who hurt are very concerned that the MAI might likely still proceed and it animals. They want judges to give more serious sentences to people would have a very negative impact on Canadian life, including who harm animals. environmental protection, employment, wage levels, health care and other programs. EUTHANASIA D (1515) Mr. Janko PeriŇ (Cambridge, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I have three petitions. In the first, over 50 petitioners wish to draw to the The petitioners are asking the House of Commons that when Don attention of the House their concerns for the sanctity of life. The Johnston and the government decide to proceed with the MAI that petitioners pray and request that parliament retain the current they have public hearings to express the concerns of all Canadians. provisions of the Criminal Code prohibiting assisted suicide and that parliament not sanction the aiding of assisted suicide or RIGHTS OF GRANDPARENTS euthanasia.

Mr. Murray Calder (Dufferin—Peel—Wellington—Grey, MULTILATERAL AGREEMENT ON INVESTMENT Lib.): Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I have a petition that states that the relationship between grandparents and grand- Mr. Janko PeriŇ (Cambridge, Lib.): In the second petition, Mr. children is a natural and fundamental one and the denial of access Speaker, some 40 constituents draw attention to their concerns can constitute abuse and can have a serious and detrimental about the impact of the multilateral agreement on investment. emotional impact on both the grandparents and the grandchildren. MARRIAGE GASOLINE Mr. Janko PeriŇ (Cambridge, Lib.): The last petition, Mr. Mrs. Rose-Marie Ur (Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, Lib.): Speaker, is signed by some 300 residents of my riding of Cam- Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I am honoured to bridge who wish to draw to the attention of the House that the present a petition signed by the residents of Waterloo, St. Thomas majority of Canadians understand a marriage to be the union of a and London who note that the use of MMT in gasoline has proven single unmarried male and a single unmarried female. 9406 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Supply The petitioners pray and request that parliament enact Bill C-225 It was a detailed question concerning expenditure around the then so as to entrench this definition and understanding in statute and upcoming APEC summit. preserve and protect the institution of marriage in the way it has always been known. We have been waiting for almost a year for an answer. I would ask the parliamentary secretary if he would look into that and come GASOLINE back with an explanation for the delay. Mr. Peter Adams: Mr. Speaker, it does take longer with some Mr. Paul Steckle (Huron—Bruce, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I have questions compared with others but I certainly will look into this pursuant to Standing Order 36 a petition signed by a good number question. of constituents from the riding of Huron—Bruce. These petitioners share the concern that the additive MMT in Canadian gasoline The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): Is it agreed that the presents an environmental problem affecting every man, woman remaining questions stand? and child in Canada. They also call on parliament to set by the end of this calendar year national clean fuel standards for gasoline with Some hon. members: Agreed. zero MMT and low sulphur content. ______MULTILATERAL AGREEMENT ON INVESTMENT

Mr. Pat Martin (Winnipeg Centre, NDP): Mr. Speaker, I join GOVERNMENT ORDERS many of my colleagues and submit a petition presented by a number of residents from British Columbia who are very con- [English] cerned that the MAI is not completely dead. These petitioners would like to drive a stake through its heart to try to make sure it SUPPLY actually stays dead because they point out what sheer folly it would be to enter into any kind of liberalized trade agreement that would ALLOTTED DAY—EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE bind us for 20 years and have such obviously detrimental effects. The House resumed consideration of the motion; and of the D (1520) amendment. Mr. Peter Stoffer (Sackville—Eastern Shore, NDP): Mr. Mr. Bob Kilger (Stormont—Dundas, Lib.) Mr. Speaker, I rise Speaker, along with my NDP colleagues, pursuant to Standing on a point of order. There have been discussions among the parties Order 36, I wish to present a petition on the MAI. They do not and I think you would find unanimous consent for the following believe for one second that this current Liberal government has any motion. I move: intentions, as my colleague from Winnipeg Centre said, to drive a stake through its heart. That at the conclusion of the present debate on today’s opposition motion, all questions necessary to dispose of this motion be deemed put, a recorded division deemed requested and deferred until Tuesday, October 27, 1998, at the expiry of the I would also like to advise the Liberal government that— time provided for Government Orders. The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): Order, please. We are (Motion agreed to) presenting petitions. We are not in debate. Just read a summary of the petition and we will get through the day. [Translation] Mr. Paul Crête (Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup—Témis- * * * couata—Les Basques, BQ): Mr. Speaker, before Oral Question Period, the member for Chicoutimi presented quite clearly the need [Translation] for the government to extend the small weeks program, if only out of a sense of fairness, compassion and responsibility toward people QUESTIONS ON THE ORDER PAPER with less income.

Mr. Peter Adams (Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the I would nevertheless like to ask the member a question. He Government in the House of Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I knows that we support the Conservative Party motion. With this move that all questions stand. small weeks pilot project, we have realized that many regions in Quebec and Canada are not currently covered by the plan and [English] should be. Mr. Svend J. Robinson (Burnaby—Douglas, NDP): Mr. The problem does not necessarily lie just in the high unemploy- Speaker, I have a point of order. I would ask the indulgence of the ment regions. In low unemployment regions as well, people not parliamentary secretary if he could look into the status of question covered by the plan are currently living with the effects of not No. 32 which was tabled almost a year ago, October 28 of last year. having the small weeks plan. October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9407

Supply This may be the best example of the need to extend the plan in The federal government should take corrective measures to fight regions of high unemployment. Would it not be a good thing if we poverty. Instead of apologizing, we must put more pressure on the were, on reflection, to consider extending the plan to all regions of government to inject additional funds into everything that impacts Canada? on poverty, including health care, social programs and, of course, employment insurance.

D (1525) [English]

Mr. André Harvey: Mr. Speaker, I would like to acknowledge Mr. Wayne Easter (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of the very efficient work done by our colleague from Kamouraska— Fisheries and Oceans, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak Rivière-du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques on related issues. to the motion by the member for Madawaska—Restigouche. Any issue touched on by Human Resources Development Canada is a social issue. Previously the minister said: ‘‘In light of the fact that we do not have all the information required, I am afraid we cannot support the For the time being, it is extremely important that the small member’s motion even though we recognize his good intentions’’. weeks program be extended, as this extension is anxiously awaited by some people. As part of a more comprehensive reform, looking Recognizing his good intentions might be stretching it a little. into everything that concerns the absolutely disproportionate sur- We are certainly all concerned and want the pilot programs pluses in the EI fund, perhaps extending this program should be continued in one fashion or another. considered, if only to show a little more sensitivity. I believe there is more than meets the eye here in terms of the intentions of the member for Madawaska—Restigouche when I read an article, dated September 23, in which Michel Vastel putting forward this motion. said ‘‘Elected representatives show an increasingly appalling in- sensitivity to the demands of ordinary citizens’’. I agree with our I am pleased that the member does recognize the value of the colleague’s comments. There is an extraordinary difference be- important changes this government has made in terms of the tween what he said and the remarks made by the Reform Party previous unemployment insurance legislation, in particular as member, who considered this measure to be completely superficial related to what was called the short week issue. and unproductive, while knowing full well that some families could use a few dozen dollars more to have decent living condi- tions, not perfect ones, just enough to live at subsistence level. I also point out a little recognition. This really happened under the guidance and the hard work of the member for Kenora—Rainy River in his previous capacity as parliamentary secretary. It is extremely important to act quickly on extending this program and to do so as part of a comprehensive reform. We saw that there was a problem in terms of short weeks. We brought it forward and he, along with a number of us, developed [English] the process to fix that short week problem. We acted on it and we have had the pilot program in place for almost two years as evidence of where to go from here. Mr. Peter Stoffer (Sackville—Eastern Shore, NDP): Mr. Speaker, with the drastic changes of EI over the last five years, would the member not agree this is just an insidious example of D (1530) this Liberal government’s downsizing its responsibility on to the backs of the provinces? Some of the earlier speeches concern me. The acting leader of the fifth party said ‘‘There has to be compassion’’ and tried to leave the impression that the EI changes brought about by this govern- An example of that is that as of September 1, after the TAGS ment lacked compassion. The hon. member is flatly wrong. In fact program, close to 9,000 people in Atlantic Canada and Quebec had this motion highlights one of the better examples of how we have to apply for social welfare because the EI premiums were either been flexible and innovative in reforming the old UI system. very insignificant or none at all. It would be useful to examine how the small weeks became an [Translation] issue in the first place.

Mr. André Harvey: Madam Speaker, our number one goal in Under the old system of UI weekly benefits depended on this country should be to eliminate poverty, a situation for which earnings in the most recent 12 to 20 insurable week periods; that is, the federal government is responsible. This same government the weeks with more than 15 hours or $150 in earnings. That was enjoys a $20 billion EI surplus that is the result of measures that, as over the last year or 52 weeks. Depending on the work patterns I said earlier, were taken by the previous government, measures under the old UI system an individual’s benefit could equal up to like the GST, free trade and tax reform. 146% of insured earnings from work. 9408 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Supply The intent of the original new EI legislation was to base benefits These projects are well received and effective. However, they are on earnings from work within a continuous period. This design slated to expire next month, which brings us to the following ensured that benefit levels were more reflective of the normal flow questions. Do we extend the pilot projects? If so, which project? of earnings from employment and there was incentive to work Do we extend the exclusion pilot which is in place in western even small weeks as every hour at work would count toward Canada or do we extend the bundling project which is in place in eligibility, duration and benefit level. It was, however, seen as eastern Canada? The bottom line in both pilot projects is the same. harshly impacting on individuals with gaps in their employment. The benefit levels for EI participants are the same under both projects. I can see how someone would want to make sure the program continues, especially when that program is delivering and One of the most illustrative examples of this happens on a potato being helpful, as has already been proven. farm where an individual works in the spring for an extended period of time, with long hours, for about six weeks. They have a fairly slack period during the summer months and then again have We need to wait for the facts. Once we have all the facts and we heavy employment in the fall during harvest. have sifted through the evidence we will all be in a better position to say whether or not these pilot projects have accomplished what they were intended to accomplish in the beginning. What clearly was happening was that an individual would be called back for a half day to grade potatoes for four hours. As a result of coming back for those four hours of work, the gap created That is why I come back to the question of whether there are a short week, which created a very serious reduction in the so-called good intentions on the other side in terms of proposing individual’s benefit level. Certainly the individuals did not want to this motion today. From my position I say that this program is go to work with this serious impact. The employers found them- needed and it needs to be continued. However, today may not be the selves with the problem of getting workers to come in for the very day to make that decision. There were a lot of changes in terms of short period of time. That was not the intention of the EI act. The the EI legislation. There are other areas where there has been injury intention was that every hour would count. and there are other areas where there has been improvement. We need to monitor all of those aspects. We cannot just come to a quick, hasty fix. We have seen the kinds of Tory fixes in the past As a result of the earlier gap issue, the legislation was amended under the old UI legislation. When we came in we had to to enable individuals to ignore up to 12 weeks of no earnings within reconfigure, change and improve upon those quick fixes. a 26 week period when calculating their benefit levels. However, that improvement, ignoring weeks of no earnings, resulted in a disincentive to accept a small week. That is, in some instances it We need to take some time. We need to be very careful and was better to have a week of no earnings versus a small week with cautious. We need to make sure the evidence is there in terms of low earnings because it would have an impact on future benefit what needs to be done, in terms of which program should be kept, returns. If a week with low earnings was included in earnings, the how it should be done, and in terms of what other measures we individual’s average earnings and thus benefit level would fall and should improve before we get into opening up the Employment that worked against our stated purpose in terms of the employment Insurance Act. insurance legislation of having every hour count. Therefore, fixing the gaps issue created the small weeks issue which we then brought [Translation] in the fix for.

Mr. Jean-Guy Chrétien (Frontenac—Mégantic, BQ): Madam D (1535 ) Speaker, I had the pleasure of visiting the riding of the member for Malpeque, who is also Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans. His riding is similar to mine in many I am very pleased with the way we on this side of the House respects, with a rather high unemployment rate. responded. When the problem came to light, the Minister of Human Resources Development asked a group of Atlantic MPs, of which I happen to be one, to talk to Canadians and to find solutions. I would like to have his comments as the representative of the We decided to pilot test a system whereby small weeks could be Minister of Human Resources Development. A former BC Mine bundled together or where they could be excluded in the calculation worker from my riding came to see me. During the period when he of average weekly earnings in the determination of the EI benefit. received EI benefits, he worked as a pallbearer at the funeral home, earning $22 each time. So he had 10 small weeks with $22 in income, one with $44 in income since he did it twice that week, and So far the results have been encouraging. About 130,000 claim- another with $66 in income since he did it three times that week. ants have benefited from these pilot programs, including a high When he applied for EI benefits for the second time, the depart- proportion of women. Together their benefits have increased by ment took the last 26 weeks with earnings, which meant 12 small about $19 per week. weeks and 14 weeks when he was working as a miner. October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9409

Supply

D (1540) Mr. Wayne Easter: Madam Speaker, again we are dealing with a specific case and we do not know all of the details. Louis-Philippe Roy, from Black Lake, earned $375 as a pallbear- er, and his EI benefits were cut by $1,734. He lost $102 a week. Did this individual and his family only manage to get two weeks Therefore, because this unemployed miner earned $375, he lost of work last year? Is the result that the divisor was 12 or 14? Is that $1,359. the reason the employment insurance is so low? I do not know because I do not have the full details of the case. That means that Louis-Philippe Roy contributed, involuntarily of course, $1,359 to the $20 billion in accumulated surplus. I can tell him that we are working in other areas. The minister spoke very eloquently in his speeches about some of the other programs that we are working on. It is not just an employment Because the unemployment rate exceeds 10% in the riding of my insurance pilot project situation that we are dealing with, it is the distinguished colleague from Malpeque, small weeks can be total situation in terms of job employment measures and labour adjusted into one single week, but this cannot be done in Thetford market training. Those areas we have to grapple with as well. We or in Black Lake because these communities are part of the greater on this side of the House will improve those areas so that these Chaudière-Appalaches region, which includes the Beauce region individuals will not find themselves in this kind of situation. where the unemployment rate is very low. Mr. Alex Shepherd (Durham, Lib.): Madam Speaker, the hon. I just wanted to draw to the attention of the House the flagrant member for Malpeque gave us a great cross-section of the small injustice of which Louis-Philippe Roy was a victim. weeks problem and how we are trying to resolve it.

[English] During an earlier interchange the member for Saint John said that some people in the House need a history lesson with regard to Mr. Wayne Easter: Madam Speaker, I appreciate the question their attitudes toward Atlantic Canada. She was responding to a of the hon. member for Frontenac—Mégantic. However, I cannot question of mine. I was basically asking why the premier of on the floor of the House of Commons get into the specifics of an Ontario was questioning whether that province should continue individual’s case. utilizing the employment insurance system to the extent that it does. He has often pointed out that Ontario, cash flow wise, is a net loser through the employment insurance system. It is certainly not His point illustrates why we need to take a little more time to the feeling of the government or Liberal members, but it certainly look at this. I think what he is suggesting is that the small weeks was seemingly odd that the leader of the Progressive Conservative pilot applies to only 29 of the HRD regions for employment Party here was taking major exception to the premier of Ontario insurance. The area he is talking about may be an area where the whose very view that is. small weeks pilot does not apply. If that is the case, then that is evidence to show how useful the small weeks pilot is. D (1545 ) I suggest to the member that he bring the specifics of that case to the Parliamentary Secretary for Human Resources Development. Most of us understand the importance of underpinning our Then we could look at it and use it as evidence in terms of this economy wherever it is, whether it is in Oshawa, Durham, the monitoring. maritimes, Sydney and so forth. These are very important aspects. I was interested, because I thought the history lesson should be directed at Mike Harris. Mr. Peter Stoffer (Sackville—Eastern Shore, NDP): Madam Speaker, I have the highest regard for the Parliamentary Secretary The motion before us today says ‘‘in order to make adjustment for Fisheries and Oceans who comes from the beautiful riding of projects a permanent feature of the Employment Insurance Act’’. Malpeque. These pilot projects which are under way are to address the issue of small weeks. Most of us can see it is some kind of idiosyncrasy of However, one of his comments greatly disturbs me. Earlier today the legislation that was written. This happens in many things. I I presented to him an EI statement from somebody in Nova Scotia worked on another issue, the Canada-U.S. tax treaty. It is amazing who got $25 a week EI, and if a person was married with children how many times things are written down with good intentions and they got $31 a week. when they actually get out in the public domain, they seem to have some unintended results. I would like him to respond to the interim leader of the Progressive Conservative Party who indicated that we must have This appears to be one of those very areas where it is possible compassion in our rules and changes. Where is the compassion that we discourage people from seeking employment because they when somebody who has worked most of their life gets $25 a week have less than full weeks of employment. The result is that it or $31 a week? Where is the compassion from the government reduces the average. Therefore in small ways they are better off not there? working at all than working. 9410 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Supply I am sure the intention of the EI reforms was to make it a major It is to that issue I think these reforms are attempting to address incentive to gain that extra hour of employment. That is what the themselves. It is why we have to make sure we get them right. average Canadian would like to do. Rather than sit at home, he or she would like to be employed even if it is only part time, which is a positive thing. Within that legislation were a number of ingenious concepts. One was the new hires program which the minister mentioned this morning in his lead off debate. My riding of Durham has a The government is trying to deal with this issue. However the tremendous impact from the automotive sector and others. That order today simply talks about extending it, enshrining it. I am program has been a great incentive for young people to get work concerned about that because here in Ottawa we do not do enough experience because the first year of the employment insurance program evaluation and accountability. These two projects, while premiums are negated. We talk about the great surplus and so forth they are coming to fruition and cycling out of the system, if you but right there are some people who are not paying into the will, up until November 15, it is clear we have not had the time to premium system and it is a major bonus. By the way, it is small sit down and actually evaluate what impacts those two solutions to business week and we should be talking about that too. It is a great the problem are having. incentive for our small business community but it is also a great incentive for those young people to get some work experience. A theory among columnists and maybe even social engineers is that people are totally conscious about how government programs We also do the same thing in our summer youth employment affect them economically and therefore they will always react in program. That is something which is taken advantage of by the their best economic interests. There is some concern that in fact young people in my riding to get that little bit of work experience that does not actually happen and it is really the intention of the so that they can access the labour market. I am sure most people in government to ensure that those people continue to have the Durham and the rest of Canada want to work. They want to find the incentive to work. up ramp to the workforce.

As well intentioned as the motion by the member for Madawas- ka—Restigouche may be, I believe it is premature. We have not The small weeks provision attempts to address the issue. The had the time to evaluate that program. We have to go through that realization is that, although we are not sure, it may cause a process before we consider any concept of extending it indefinitely. disincentive for people to seek some employment rather than none at all. Part of the EI reforms tried to encourage the productivity of the Canadian labour force. This is something that is hard for people to Some of the members, especially in the NDP, have raised the measure. Canada’s productivity vis-à-vis many of our trading concern about the deviation between unemployment insurance partners is significantly lower. Some blame the unemployment reductions and tax cuts and why somehow these reductions should insurance system; some blame other processes and some of our go back to the people who actually put the money into the system. cultural differences. Invariably tax cuts are assumed somehow to be benefits for the The reality is that Canada’s productivity has been increasing wealthy. The reality is that our country has a problem, which has since this act has been changed. It is on that issue which I think it is been raised by other members, called bracket creep. In fact, the very important that we get it right and in such a way that we do the people being hit by an inflationary spiral are in the lower and evaluation and our homework and we ensure that we continue to be middle income brackets, the workers. on the right course.

It should be a policy of this government to take some of that Obviously the minister has realized there is a problem. It is an surplus and direct it to people who make $20,000 or $40,000 worth unintended one. Obviously we do not want people to sit at home of income. I am talking about the working poor. Some of these rather than work. Clearly there are some objectives we are trying to people hit marginal rates of tax in excess of 50% or 60% by moving seek. from $18,000 to $20,000 worth of income. What does that do? It creates a barrier. People cannot get out of poverty. They cannot get D (1550 ) out of that cycle of low income.

Some people look at the value of our dollar. Sometimes the value Why would it not be a great thing to shift that surplus from of our dollar is underpinned somewhat with the labour productivity corporations to some extent to assist those people by giving them factor. If our labour productivity factor does not improve, the back the indexing of the income tax system. It would help them Canadian dollar will continue to go down. This is the way increase their disposable income. That is a lot more beneficial than international currency equates productivity. If we are less produc- some of the programs we talk about simply giving it back to the tive, it means that the value of our dollar is less vis-à-vis other corporations which paid 60% of the employment insurance pre- currencies where the labour factors are more productive. miums in the first place. October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9411

Supply In conclusion, as well intended as it may be, I believe this riding, General Motors says that it puts in a buck and gets 60 cents motion is premature. The motion should be rejected because we back. need to do our homework before making any decisions. The point of the matter is that as a country we are bigger than the Mr. Greg Thompson (New Brunswick Southwest, PC): Mad- province of Ontario. The Progressive Conservative premier in the am Speaker, I was listening with great attention to the member for province of Ontario is clearly saying that we should amend the Durham. I have a clarification on a reference he made to the unemployment insurance system so we do not share that money member for Saint John. I know there were little questions and with Atlantic Canada. So the coffee is cooking. Realize that for responses between the two of them earlier in the day. I think I know what he is saying. The Progressive Conservative leader in the what the member for Saint John was talking about in reference to province of Ontario is saying to hell with you guys. It is not Ontario and the premier of Ontario. something we believe in. We believe this is a bigger country than the province of Ontario but that is not the viewpoint of the premier of Ontario. D (1555 ) Mr. Dick Harris (Prince George—Bulkley Valley, Ref.): I think the premier of Ontario is rightly upset because Ontario’s Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for economy is very robust and we do not question that. I understand Calgary Centre. that the member comes from an area where the economy is going along very nicely, thank you very much. I am pleased to speak to the supply day motion put forward by the fifth party in the House. The premier of Ontario was concerned that not very many people in Ontario collect unemployment insurance in relation to the rest of Many of the members preceding me have gone through the the country. Ontario constitutes about 40% of the Canadian econo- details of the program. I would like to talk to a few points which my. It is the lowest area in the country for benefits in terms of cause our party some concern. The first concern is that this unemployed workers receiving benefits. The premier has a right to program which is due to expire on November 15 of this year still is be concerned about that as they are paying in but not reaping the without any type of evaluation. While the supply day motion may rewards. It is not that they want to because obviously it is better to have some merit, I think it is quite premature. have people working than not working. The Liberal member opposite talked about accountability. I The statistics speak for themselves. I will quote statistics know members of the government tend to choke on that word but released by the Department of Human Resources Development we will accept the fact that the member was sincere in his about a week ago. The statistics will bear this out. comments. The SW program is probably one of those programs that should be evaluated before we decide to make it a permanent In Ontario fewer than 30% of the unemployed get unemploy- fixture. ment insurance, the lowest rate in the country. In comparing the 10 D provinces and 50 U.S. states, Ontario is between Montana and (1600 ) Missouri and just below the average for the United States as a whole. The House would have been well served if the fifth party would have put forward a motion that tried to cure the illness rather than simply provide some medicine to look after the symptoms. We That is part of the point the member for Saint John was making should be demanding from the government that it create an and probably the member for Durham as well. What we are looking environment in Atlantic Canada where people can actually go to at and the premier is saying is let us look at what we are doing with work. the surplus because the surplus does not exist. Premier Harris is saying ‘‘You are taking more out of my workers and my employers The EI programs are fine and the benefits are fine for those who than you have to’’. The federal government is applying that surplus are temporarily out of work, but must we always be focusing on in the EI account against general revenues. It simply disappears. benefit programs? I believe the motion focuses on the wrong There is no account. subject. We should be talking about what it takes to create jobs. That should be what the government and all of us in the House are In terms of the EI surplus I would like to hear what the member paying attention to and not benefits. Let us get these people back to for Durham has to say. work again.

Mr. Alex Shepherd: Madam Speaker, you cannot suck and blow While we are talking about Atlantic Canada let us talk about the at the same time. failure of the government, the Tory government before it and the Liberal government before that, and how they sold out the interests The reality is that within the province of Ontario we have the of the Atlantic Canada fishermen. Some years ago someone on this same kinds of things. There are certain areas in the province where side of the House decided it would be a good idea to allow foreign there is high unemployment and there are net beneficiaries of the boats to fish the waters off Atlantic Canada and reap the harvests. unemployment system. In other areas, for instance in my own There was a bountiful harvest back then sometimes. They thought 9412 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Supply it would be a good idea to trade the interests of the Atlantic back in the form of reduced EI premiums, as the EI commission fishermen and Atlantic Canada in order for the provinces of has clearly said and as the finance minister’s own actuary and Ontario and Quebec to sell manufactured goods in return to those advisors have clearly said, massive jobs would be created. European countries. The finance minister is not hearing anything about that. He Someone got shafted in that deal, and who was it? It was the wants to get his hands on that money, plain and simple, so that he Atlantic provinces and the maritimes. To boost the interests of can continue Liberal government overspending. Incidentally the Ontario and Quebec those governments simply sold Atlantic government overspent its spending budget by some $3 billion last Canada down the tube by allowing this massive overfishing by year despite all the crowing it did about balancing the budget and foreign interests in order that they could sell manufactured goods maybe having a surplus. In times like this that is atrocious. from Ontario and Quebec in Europe. What is even worse is that most of that overspending went to That was a tragedy. The results of that tragedy, of that insane build a millennium monument for our Prime Minister who will decision, are still going on today. That is why we are talking about probably be gone after the year 2000. He wants to leave behind this how we provide benefits for Atlantic Canadians who have no jobs. millennium project legacy which the government says will benefit post-secondary education. Billions of dollars will be spent to benefit only about 5%, if that, of all post-secondary education The focus of the government should be jobs, jobs, jobs. Jobs are students. created by allowing the private sector to operate in an environment that is conducive to establishing a buoyant economy. They should be provided with low tax levels. There should be incentives for The finance minister wants to scoop that $7 billion to make a investors and business people to start new businesses and to expand legacy for his Prime Minister. He wants to build an election slush their existing businesses. There should be some tax relief for fund leading up to the next election so he can miraculously open employees of those companies from the massive burden heaped the dikes and let the cash flow out. This is just a farce. I think upon them by these governments. That would put more money in members opposite realize what the finance minister is doing. the hands of consumers which would allow them to spend the money within the economy and as a consumer driven economy it Mr. Greg Thompson: Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of would grow. order. As much as I enjoy listening to the member, it is my understanding that we are in 10 minute speeches and he is splitting his time with his colleague next door. I am hoping that we could The focus is wrong here. We should be talking about the hear from his colleague. obligation of government to create an environment that would allow the economy to become more buoyant and that would allow more jobs to be created in Atlantic Canada. That is where we The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault): The hon. member still should be focusing our attention. We should not be trying to simply has 49 seconds left in his speech. put a band-aid fix on a very serious problem. Mr. Dick Harris: Madam Speaker, I am sure the hon. member While we are on the subject of employment insurance programs from the fifth party would love to hear me speak all day about how I must talk about the massive raids the Minister of Finance and the mismanaged the government is under the Liberals. Eventually I Liberal government are embarking on in relation to the current would have to get to the performance of the Tory government that surplus in the EI program. There will exist approximately $22 preceded it. Probably I should wrap up. billion in the EI surplus. I am not saying that money is there. As a matter of fact there is nothing there but an IOU from our finance Let me get back to my main point. Although the motion may be minister because he has already scooped it all. an apple pie motion, it is premature. The program has not been properly evaluated and that has to be done before we would consider supporting the motion. D (1605 )

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault): Since there is a lot of The EI commission has clearly said that in order to sustain the EI interest in asking questions I would ask that members co-operate fund and to provide a contingency fund for rainy days a surplus of and keep their questions and answers short. some $15 billion would be required. That would be enough. Mr. Wayne Easter (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of The finance minister is about to pilfer that fund to the tune of Fisheries and Oceans, Lib.): Madam Speaker, this will not take about $7 billion simply because he wants the money. He will long. The member should be congratulating us on foreign fishing. change the law to get his hands on money that rightfully belongs to Whereas it was 350,000 tonnes in the late 1970s, it is down to 2,000 Canadian employers and employees. If that money were turned tonne per year now. October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9413

Supply The member for Prince—George Bulkley Valley has demon- I have 17% unemployment in my home town of Prince George. strated that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. He must have We do not have access to a program like this one. If this program been down there with the finance committee. That is what it after evaluation has been determined to have some merit, to give it demonstrates. to one section of the country, one small section only, is basically saying to the rest of the country that it just does not count. Is the member suggesting that the EI fund should be used for tax reductions rather than for employment measures? Is that what he is The Liberal government has been doing this to Canada as long as suggesting? it has been in power, as have the Tories before it. It favours one part of the country over another. It has fostered in the nation everything D (1610 ) that has given rise to differences, to dividing the country through its policies. It is about time the government started treating Canada like a family and treating everyone equally. Second, would he not agree that the government is doing a lot in terms of creation of jobs through the transitional job fund, the Canadian opportunities strategy, the youth employment strategy, Mr. Eric Lowther (Calgary Centre, Ref.): Madam Speaker, I new hires programs and others? appreciate the remarks of my esteemed colleague and want to touch on a few key comments as well. Mr. Dick Harris: Madam Speaker, I would like to respond to the hon. member across by reminding him that he knows very well It might cause some confusion for those who are listening to hear the best possible employment measure we can take is to reduce the about small weeks, big weeks, and the difference between one taxation burden on Canadian businesses and workers. That is how week and another. The motion deals with the unemployment to build a buoyant economy. That, contrary to what the Liberals insurance adjustment program which allows individuals who have say, is backed up by mountains and mountains of historical worked only a portion of a week, perhaps part time or that kind of evidence. thing, to combine this work and apply it to their overall income to derive benefits from the EI plan. We find that almost every country with a very reasonable tax regime has a buoyant economy. We only have to look to the D (1615 ) province of Ontario where the Premier of Ontario has reduced personal income taxes by 30%. As a result, did Ontario bring in less taxes? No. Overall it brought in 10% more in taxes and the On the face of it there is some good rationale for that kind of employers, the workers and everyone are far happier. initiative to encourage people to continue to work, even if it is only part time, and not be penalized by reduced benefits. It sounds like a [Translation] good idea.

Mr. Jean-Guy Chrétien (Frontenac—Mégantic, BQ): Madam I think what is a key element here is that the motion is perhaps Speaker, when the Liberal government agreed to bundle small premature today because we have spent $230 million on this weeks to have more acceptable weeks, it agreed to do it in only 29 program. There has been a $230 million increase in expenses regions where the unemployment rates were the highest. because of this change. I guess the member opposite pointed out that this is a sign that the program is working. This is clearly a If the unemployment rate is 10.5% in one area and 9.4% in the program that is needed. neighbouring one, this does not mean poverty and hardship do not exist there. What we have to ask ourselves, now that we have spent $230 million, is has that actually encouraged people to work as opposed I would ask my distinguished colleague whether he would to not working and collecting a higher premium when it comes to support a motion asking the government to extend the program to the part time or short week type of work? Has it actually achieved every region in Canada where small weeks could be bundled to the result of encouraging people to take on this part time or have more acceptable weeks so that a former miner at the BC Mine, seasonal work? We do not have the answers to those questions. Louis-Philippe Roy, is not penalized for having been of service by acting as a pallbearer for the funeral parlour. This is a fundamental issue that is at play. I want to speak to this today because I see so many of the initiatives that are taken by [English] governments, the government across the way in particular, and governments right across the land where there is no evaluation. I Mr. Dick Harris: Madam Speaker, the hon. member raises an mean a third party evaluation, not an evaluation done by the excellent point that I did not have time to mention in my presenta- government itself. Those kinds of evaluations are subject to tion. As a matter of fact what we have here is regional inequality. If political bias and possibly moving dollars in the way that will we are to give something to one part of the country, why on earth derive votes and support. I do not like to make those kinds of would we not give it to the rest of the family? accusations, but I have seen enough to make me skeptical. 9414 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Supply My concern is that there has been absolutely no evaluation. I workers and employers pay and we would still have some left over came from a business background and if we were to spend $230 for that rainy day. Yet we do not see it happening. million on anything along the way there would be assessments. Is this actually reaching the target? Are we encouraging people to continue to work? Are we achieving our goals? If not, shut it I have in my riding the Canadian Restaurant and Foodservices down and come up with something better. If we are, try to find Association. Those people lobby me and talk to me on a regular ways to score more toward the goal to derive more benefit. basis. I have many restaurant owners in my riding and they have continually come to me and said ‘‘Please put pressure on the finance minister to roll back the EI premiums that we are forced to What do we have today? We have a motion that says ‘‘Keep it pay’’. going. Keep spending the money. Somebody is collecting the money, therefore, it must be working’’. This is an industry that employs many young people. It is their first step into the workplace. This group of small business people This is a fundamental problem with the Liberal government in point out to me that this is the worst thing that the finance minister the way it approaches these types of issues. We have an auditor can do. We all applaud and praise small business as the engine of general who evaluates the government and I have read many of his the economy, yet we skewer them with higher taxes, particularly recommendations. I think he often makes some very good recom- payroll taxes. These payroll taxes must be rolled back, but we are mendations that point out shortcomings. A third party evaluation of not seeing that and I think it is tragic. the money spent. Unfortunately it does not seem that the Liberal government acts on too many of the auditor general’s recommenda- tions. If it does it is very slow. These are issues that I believe are even more important than the one we are debating today. It surprised me that this was actually the motion the Progressive Conservative Party felt needed to be The key thing is that we must have some assessment of whether debated here today. or not these tax dollars are actually deriving the stated benefit. If in fact they are, then perhaps we can improve on it. Is it likely that we would actually see the Liberal Party roll back these EI payroll taxes? I would suggest that it is not. I would point As my hon. colleague said, why just Atlantic Canada? Why not to the budget debate last spring when the Liberals said that they other parts of Canada? In my own riding there are people who are wanted to spend any surplus. The official opposition at the time unemployed. Do they have any less trauma by being unemployed proposed broad based tax relief for Atlantic Canadians totalling or any less of a challenge in making it day to day than someone in over $900 per year. That is really what is needed. We do not need Atlantic Canada? I would say not. Why do they not have access to more in the way of strengthened social programs. People get it if in fact it is working? self-esteem and fulfilment from a job and we should be working toward providing jobs to Atlantic Canadians. Another benefit of evaluation is that we might come up with some better ideas, for Atlantic Canada particularly. In this day and I am not the only one saying this. Let me quote Fred McMahon, age, with the information age, there are many new challenges in a senior policy analyst with the Atlantic Institute for Market gaining new skills and that $230 million could retrain 23,000 Studies. He says that the EI merry-go-round seems like a good idea workers at $10,000 a worker. There are a lot of potential abilities for Atlantic Canada, but it is often not working. He goes on to say and a lot of new markets that those people could move into. If it that the EI system has undermined Atlantic Canada’s growth was set up as a loan program we could benefit three to four times prospects. It has marginalized thousands of workers and even that many people with new training. helped destroy our fish. Now, this is not me, this is Fred McMahon, senior policy analyst with the Atlantic Institute for Market Studies. We do not question these things when we do not properly It has not been good for Atlantic Canada by any measure. These are evaluate these programs. Someone is collecting. Just keep it people who have studied the situation and they are saying that this rolling. There is no accountability at the end of the day with respect is not the way to go in the best interests of Atlantic Canadians. to where those tax dollars are going. I point out again that if we had followed the reducing taxes and D (1620 ) paying down debt approach in Atlantic Canada long advocated by the Reform Party as opposed to holding on to these high payroll taxes through the employment insurance program, if we had gone But again, is this so unusual? Tragically no. The government has instead with our proposals, we would see a grand total of over $1 treated the EI fund, basically, I am afraid to say, as a cash cow. It is billion a year in the pockets of long suffering Atlantic taxpayers, not really being treated as a benefit program for workers. We have money which could be spent and invested not by bureaucrats and accumulated a $19 billion surplus. It is accumulating at $7 billion a politicians but by Atlantic Canadians themselves to improve their year. There is room for a 33% reduction in the premiums that own lives and future. October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9415

Supply Mr. Charles Hubbard (Miramichi, Lib.): Madam Speaker, I A Canadian in Calgary, in our estimation, is no different from a know that across this country we have a lot of different interests Canadian in the Atlantic provinces. and a lot of different concerns. However, it amazes me sometimes that some of us in one area of the country can become such experts Mr. Peter Stoffer (Sackville—Eastern Shore, NDP): Madam on someplace else. It is one of the facts in the House. Speaker, it is interesting to hear Reform members stand to quote their friends in the right wing sectors of society. D (1625 ) I would remind the hon. member that the finance minister went I have a question for the hon. member. I appreciate his sincerity to Halifax after the recent EI cuts of last year and asked the in trying to deal with these issues. As with the previous speaker, I chamber of commerce a direct question: ‘‘If I reduce the premiums support the concept that we have of attempting to put together what by another 20%, how many jobs would you create?’’ He asked the I call small weeks or grouping of hours in areas of high unemploy- entire chamber of commerce that question at its luncheon meeting. ment. Nobody could give an answer. There was no answer. Nobody could stand to say that they would create a job tomorrow if he reduced EI In Atlantic Canada, in particular, we have a good number of premiums. Not one. That was the finance minister asking the industries that rely upon workers for very short periods of time. chamber of commerce that question. The hon. member mentioned Fred McMahon. He was also there for that meeting. I was home during Thanksgiving week and it rained every day of that week. Fishing boats go out to sea, but sometimes they cannot If the Reform Party really wants to cut taxes it should start harvest fish every day of the week. If we want our fish factories and working on cutting the GST and the HST in this country. Then we our smaller firms to work in Atlantic Canada we have to provide an will have a serious tax cut that will help to create jobs right across opportunity for people to put their hours together to constitute this country. weeks for unemployment insurance purposes. Mr. Eric Lowther: Madam Speaker, I point out to the hon. Is the member aware of this problem and the concerns that we member that a number of studies have been done which show that a have? I point out to him that it was not the workers who came to us 1% reduction in payroll taxes in this country will create thousands in the Atlantic caucus asking for small weeks or days to be put of jobs. together, rather it was the industries in Atlantic Canada that were having difficulty providing 40 hours of employment for X number It is interesting that he would note the fact that the people this of weeks for their workers. question was put to said they were not sure how many jobs it would create. However, study after study shows that if we reduce payroll Perhaps he could relate to the House his concept of this problem taxes people hire more people. and how he and his party would deal with it. [Translation] Mr. Eric Lowther: Madam Speaker, I appreciate the question. We should all be aware that we are all Canadians from one side of The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault): Order, please. It is my the country to the other. The approach of saying that what works in duty, pursuant to Standing Order 38, to inform the House that the one part of the country will not work in another is what underlies a questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as lot of the policies of the Liberal government that have caused follows: the hon. member for Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, division in this country. Fisheries; the hon. member for Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup— Témiscouata—Les Basques, Millennium Scholarships. I can tell members that there is seasonal work in my province. There is seasonal work in my riding. The people who experience D (1630) seasonal work have the same challenges, the same problems, the same concerns as people in Atlantic Canada. To say that the Canadian in Atlantic Canada who is in this situation is different Mr. Robert Bertrand (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister than the Canadian in Calgary who feels that same set of challenges of National Defence, Lib.): Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my works against the whole coming together of Canada and making a time with a colleague. stronger nation. I think the premise of his question is incorrect. The hon. member for Madawaska—Restigouche would like the As far as the short weeks program is concerned, we have stated government to make the small weeks pilot projects a permanent that it sounds like a good idea. It could be beneficial. We are not feature of the employment insurance system. necessarily against it. What we are against is extending additional dollars to a program that has not been thoroughly evaluated to see Like some of my colleagues on this side of the House, I greatly if it is actually encouraging people to get out and work and to work appreciate this salutary debate on the employment insurance part time as opposed to staying off EI benefits. That is the crux of system, but I must stress that these projects are, as their name it. shows, pilot projects. They were established in March 1997 to test 9416 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Supply other means of calculating EI benefits for a period ending Novem- that is what pilot projects are for: to provide information that will ber 15 of this year. serve as a basis for the development of long term policies.

When it set up the employment insurance system in 1996, Whether the hon. member likes it or not, policies cannot, and undertaking the first major reform of the unemployment insurance should not, be developed without due consideration. The govern- program in 25 years, the government knew full well that it was ment must thoroughly review the results before taking action. To facing a very complicated situation. do otherwise would be to act hastily.

Adjustment pilot projects were launched precisely to determine We in this House of the Parliament of Canada know how how to solve the problems faced by workers earning less than $150 essential the employment insurance system is to the social fabric of a week. These adjustment projects were implemented in 29 Cana- this country. That is why small weeks projects must be put in the dian regions where the unemployment rate consistently exceeded appropriate context. In establishing a new employment insurance 10%. system, the Government of Canada wanted to introduce an hour based system.

These measures were taken because some thought that the new D legislation was dissuading people from taking part time jobs. Some (1635) workers thought a week without income was better than a week with a small income that would reduce their EI benefits. In particular, it wanted to encourage Canadians to accept the work that was available. To all appearances, that is exactly what the new employment insurance program has enabled it to do. As the Since the government’s general objective is to put unemployed pilot programs have shown, the government is fully prepared to Canadians back to work, pilot projects were created to examine listen and to act. possible solutions to this problem. Two methods of calculating benefits were tested. The first one was to bundle small weeks and the second one, to exclude them. As I have said, this reform is the broadest in a quarter of a century. That is why the government is prepared to examine the effects of the reform, and to make the necessary changes. They were two different ways of solving the problem of reduced work weeks in high unemployment regions. But both methods had During this debate, much reference has been made to the the same positive results for employment insurance recipients. It beneficiaries to unemployed ratio. I must start off by pointing out was a matter of methodology, as one can except with pilot projects. that the beneficiaries to unemployed ratio was never established to measure the proportion of unemployed workers receiving employ- The Government of Canada wanted to see which calculation ment insurance, and also more importantly that the it does not have method would work best and to determine the impact of pilot a great deal to say about how effective the employment insurance projects in general. It is important to remember this. The purpose program is at attaining its objectives. Why? Because the program is of the pilot projects was to find solutions and to determine what not intended to pay benefits to unemployed persons with tenuous or would work best. non-existent links to the labour market, or those who have left their jobs without justification. What were the results of these pilot projects? Since their implementation in May and August of 1997, 130,000 benefit The employment insurance program applies to 78% of Cana- periods have been established for small work weeks. Almost 12% dians with links to the labour market who have lost their jobs or of benefit claims submitted in participating regions involved small resigned for valid reasons. weeks. And although we have made great strides in the area of employ- What is important is that the people participating in the projects ment insurance, we should recognize that the plan cannot meet the received benefits averaging $19 or about 10% more per week. I needs of all unemployed Canadians. Everyone must realize that must specify that this group of recipients included more women— employment insurance is only part of the solution. about 61%—than men. Other government measures are required and are in the process of implementation: measures to help people with disabilities, Also, since these projects were implemented in high unemploy- including a $30 million employability assistance fund over three ment regions, more than 51% of applications came from Quebec years to help them find work; the aboriginal human resources and 35% from the Atlantic provinces. Overall, these preliminary development strategy, spread over five years and supported by a results are encouraging. board headed by the private sector aimed at improving native people’s access to employment; the youth employment strategy to However, these are preliminary—and I insist on this word—pre- help young people, including those at risk, to make a successful liminary results, and the analysis has not been completed. After all, transition from school to work. October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9417

Supply Finally, we set up the Canadian opportunities strategy to ensure whole issue of the impact of EI reform, but the government is not that all Canadians have greater access to education and to the skills interested. that will enable them to find and keep a better job. Nevertheless, the government does not have all the answers. Mr. Robert Bertrand: Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. member for her question. I clearly remember that when we were The concerns of the unemployed must become the concerns of elected in 1993, the unemployment rate—as I like to point out— all of us in the federal and provincial governments and in the was close to 12%. The Minister of Finance and the government put private sector. in place certain tax policies, with the result that the national unemployment rate is now at 8.3%, if I am not mistaken. We must work together to find solutions. We must also not lose sight of the problems the employment insurance program was I must say that even in Quebec, in spite of the terrible threat of established to attack. It is not enough to make the plan more separation that hangs over our heads, the unemployment rate has flexible in order to resolve the problems. That is not a solution. also gone down. I believe it is now around 10%.

As I said earlier, the situation is complex and will not be I am the first to admit that there is work to do, but I am resolved with simple solutions. That having been said, we must convinced that in a few months, when a new government is in continue to assess how Canadians and our economy are adjusting to office in Quebec, that rate will continue to go down. the new EI regime. Mr. Jean-Guy Chrétien (Frontenac—Mégantic, BQ): Madam Fortunately, the economic picture is improving in Canada. We Speaker, I remind my distinguished colleague, the Parliamentary are achieving some success in our efforts to lower the country’s Secretary to the Minister of National Defence, that the pilot project unemployment rate. In September, the unemployment rate was is currently being tried out in only 29 regions. The poverty to which 8.3%, the lowest it has been in eight years. we often allude in this House does not exist only in these 29 regions of Canada. In my riding, for example, the government refused to recognize the region of Thetford Mines, using the pretext that it We have also seen a 10.3% increase in the number of young was part of a very large region, Region No. 13, Chaudière—Appa- people with jobs since the beginning of the year. The number of laches, and also part of the Estrie region, where the unemployment jobs has increased by a total of 1.3 million since October 1993. rate is artificially lower.

Clearly, we are making headway. Together, we can attain our I ask the parliamentary secretary whether an unfair practice is common goal of helping Canadians rejoin the workforce. As the being used to penalize certain regions where the unemployment statistics so clearly show, that is exactly what we are in the process rate is high, but which have a lower unemployment rate when taken of doing. together. There is a reason why, within a period of four years, EI contributions have allowed the government to accumulate a surplus Mrs. Christiane Gagnon (Québec, BQ): Mr. Speaker, the way of $20 billion. If there is a $20 billion surplus, it is because there the government member is going on, it is clear he has his head in are people who make EI contributions, but who do not collect the sand, just like the Minister of Human Resources Development. benefits. It is somewhat like being insured against fire, having your They apparently do not want to move too quickly because we are house burn down, and being told ‘‘You did pay premiums, but you living in one of the best countries in the world. were not covered, so you should have avoided that situation’’.

The pilot project was rushed in right after the reform because the It is not very bright on the government’s part to make the poor new reform turned out to be unfair. even poorer.

D (1640) Mr. Robert Bertrand: Madam Speaker, as I said in my speech, these are only pilot projects, and the government will make The Liberals are making it up as they go along. They are stalling adjustments according to their results. for time on this issue. Why? Because there is a $20 billion surplus in the EI fund and it has come out of the pockets of unemployed In conclusion I would like to point out that I do not entirely agree Canadians. with the numbers referred to by my honourable colleague. Accord- ing to the numbers I have, 80% of applicants receive benefits. I would ask my colleague opposite to get moving. Money is being slowly siphoned out of the pockets of the unemployed to D (1645) plump up the EI fund while this government is no longer contribut- ing anything at all. This is affecting employees and employers. The [English] Bloc Quebecois has introduced six bills to improve the system. We have to stop worrying. We are only too aware of the system’s Mr. John Richardson (Perth—Middlesex, Lib.): Madam impact. In fact, we have asjed the committee to give priority to the Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity to participate in this 9418 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Supply important debate on the motion brought forward by the hon. that in areas with strong economic growth people are finding jobs member for Madawaska—Restigouche. rather than having to apply for EI benefits.

As the Minister of Human Resources Development and other Speaking of jobs, over the past five years 1.3 million Canadians colleagues have already noted, the government is assessing the have found employment. The International Monetary Fund and the viability of the small weeks concept and we are closer to making a OECD predict that this year Canada’s job growth rate will be the decision on how these projects can best serve the employment fastest among the major industrialized nations. needs of Canadians. While we acknowledge that the unemployment rate remains a It is important to stress that employment insurance is the most challenge, although it is now at the lowest level in eight years, no comprehensive reform of income support in 25 years. It should be one can say we are not making progress. quite evident that a reform of this magnitude would require certain adjustments. That is the real measure of success for this new income support system, fewer unemployed, not more EI beneficiaries. The goal Members opposite have also expressed concern regarding the after all is to help unemployed Canadians get back to work. benefits to unemployment ratio, commonly referred to as the BU ratio. The government recognizes that monitoring and assessment reports are a crucial part of EI reform. It is important to inform In this regard the government has conducted a study on the BU Canadians on the impact that reform of the income support system ratio. The study indicated that the ratio was not a good indicator of is having on individuals and their communities. Given its magni- how well the employment insurance system is doing. The problem tude and the limited time the EI system has been in place, I believe is that the ratio does not distinguish between those workers for this first of five annual reports indicates that we are moving in the whom the program was designed and those for whom the program right direction. was never intended.

What the study showed is that the decline in BU ratio over the I said EI cannot be expected to address the needs of all past 10 years is the result of a 50:50 split between the changes to unemployed Canadians. That is why we have other measures that I the employment insurance program and changes in the labour have mentioned. market. The study showed 78% of unemployed workers who lost their jobs or quit with just cause were eligible for EI. Our goal is inclusive. We are committed to helping Canadians move into the economic mainstream and become self-reliant, I remind hon. members that the purpose of EI is to provide contributing members of their communities. temporary benefits to unemployed Canadians who have an attach- ment to the labour force. In that regard, the evidence strongly I am sure hon. members will agree that nothing fights poverty suggests that EI is meeting its objective. better than a rewarding job.

We have not forgotten the Canadians who do not qualify for D (1650 ) income benefits under the new EI system. We are addressing the needs of those individuals through a number of EI related initia- That is the thrust behind the transitional jobs fund which has tives. I am thinking of initiatives such as the active employment helped to create 31,000 jobs in high unemployment regions. measures under EI, the transitional jobs fund, the youth employ- ment strategy, the Canadian opportunities strategy and the new hires program. We also have the family income supplement which helps low income EI claimants with children. We have contributed $190 At the same time let us be realistic. EI alone will not be able to million to a new federal-provincial initiative that helps people with address the needs of all unemployed Canadians. EI is not a disabilities to gain better access to the workforce. panacea. It is simply one of several tools that Canadian workers can use to help return to the labour market. As well, we have taken steps that directly address child poverty. We increased the Canada child tax benefit by $850 million in July As members opposite are aware, the EI act calls for five annual and we will further increase it by another $850 million in the next monitoring and assessment reports to determine how well individu- two years. als and communities are adjusting to the new system. These initial investments which will benefit low income families The 1997 report is the first, and naturally it gives us a general will increase our total investment for children to about $6.8 billion indication of the impact EI is having. This is to be expected with a by the year 2000. new system as it encounters the real needs of Canadians. We know, for example, that some people are finding extra weeks of work I remind the hon. member for Madawaska—Restigouche that before applying for unemployment insurance. It is terrific to see Canadians told us in no uncertain terms that the old unemployment October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9419

Supply insurance system was out of date and badly in need of reform. It The Canadian opportunities strategy and the new hires program was a passive system that did not encourage unemployed workers are positive initiatives. This is the first year through. We have seen to return to the labour force. EI on the other hand encourages it. There are problems. We admit that. We have to address them. I workers to take all available work before applying for funds. agree with the member that one of the best ways is to cut taxes.

We do not want to return to the days where the UI system was Mr. Monte Solberg (Medicine Hat, Ref.): Madam Speaker, the regularly used to supplement incomes. The government is monitor- hon. member mentioned that Canada is leading the G-7 in job ing the system carefully. I encourage members opposite to join creation but I wonder if the hon. member is aware that in 1986 with us in helping Canadians find work. For these reasons I cannot Canada and the U.S. were tied in terms of the employment rate at vote in favour of the hon. member’s motion. approximately 60%.

Mr. Jean Dubé (Madawaska—Restigouche, PC): Madam In the last 12 years in the United States the employment rate has Speaker, the hon. member and the speaker before him spoke of job grown to 63%. Our employment rate has stayed at 60%. If they had creation. I would much rather be talking about that today. The way stayed at the same level we would have over one million more jobs to create jobs in Canada is to reduce taxes. Until that is done, there in Canada today. are regions in Canada, not only Atlantic Canada, which are affected. What do we do with these people, these regions? This I suggest to the member his statistics do not tell the whole story. pilot project helps them considerably. D The hon. member talked about fiscal measures that have been (1655) put in place. I would like the hon. member to please tell this House what measures they put in place. Was it the GST? Was it free trade? I suggest that if Canada were creating jobs at the same pace as Was it the cut to transfer payments? Was it the cuts to unemploy- the United States we would have virtually no unemployment today. ment that affected these people we are talking about today? While I understand why the member wants to pat himself on the back, it is not as clear cut as he suggests. Does this member not think that the measures put in place after the reform to employment insurance helped these 29 regions How in the world can he justify getting up in this place today and throughout Canada? Does the member not think the government saying we are not going to support the motion because we do not should have a measure in place today, that the study should be in have our study done? His party is putting together the study. Three place three weeks before the deadline, and that the pilot project be weeks away from the time when the program comes to and end it renewed immediately? still does not have an assessment. How can that happen?

Mr. John Richardson: Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. Mr. John Richardson: Madam Speaker, just to put the record member for his intervention. Does the member not think it is straight, the International Monetary Fund and the OECD have worthwhile that the active measures are far more effective for EI predicted that Canada will lead the job growth rate in the industrial- than giving supplementary income and keeping people on the ized nations. We will see it this year. margin, not getting trained for a new job? The Americans are by far the best off of the industrialized Does the member think the transitional jobs fund is not worth- countries at the moment. There is no doubt about that. We are not while by helping people get training so they can upgrade them- trying to oversell that. At the same time if they are predicting right, selves for jobs that are available? Does the member not think these we are catching up because we will be leading this year in job employment strategies are good strategies for these people? creation.

Mr. Jean Dubé: They are not working. [Translation]

Mr. John Richardson: How do you know? Mrs. Christiane Gagnon (Québec, BQ): Madam Speaker, I will share my time with my colleague, the member for Rosemont. Mr. Jean Dubé: Why is the employment rate so high? It is with a great deal of interest that I take part in the debate on Mr. John Richardson: We are leading all the OECD countries the motion moved by the member of the Conservative Party asking at the moment in job creation. the government to amend the Employment Insurance Act in order to permanently extend the small weeks adjustment projects put in Mr. Jean Dubé: Not all regions of Canada. place by the Minister for Human Resources Development in March 1997. Mr. John Richardson: I agree with the member. It is spotty. There is no doubt about it. We have to target those regions. The As we know such pilot projects are being tried out in 29 regions. member is right on. We also know that they will come to an end on November 15. 9420 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Supply The Bloc Quebecois supports the Conservative Party’s motion. Conservative Party’s proposal. This illustrates once again that the However, if it had been possible, we would have liked to move Bloc Quebecois’ approach is balanced, fair and equitable. an amendment asking the government to make the pilot projects a permanent feature in the 54 EI administrative areas, and to We know there are a number of other unfair aspects in the address the unfairness in the current Employment Insurance Act, current Employment Insurance Act and the Bloc has condemned which promotes increased poverty and deprives millions of people several of them since the reform. One of these aspects is the from the benefits of economic growth. immediate elimination of discrimination against some categories of unemployed on the basis of their so-called presence in the We know that a great many people who are not eligible to EI end workforce. up too quickly on welfare. Last December, the Bloc Quebecois introduced six bills aimed at improving the lean program the We know that a woman who has taken care of her child from employment insurance system has become. birth to age two and who goes back to work will have to work 30% to 117% more hours to be eligible for the same benefits as regular Bill C-296, introduced by the Bloc Quebecois, dealt among other claimants. It depends on the regional unemployment rate. things with small weeks, and was aimed at extending them to every region. We know that the level of benefits should be determined When the minister says that the reform is helping women and based on the average of the weeks with the highest earnings, rather young people, we can see, with figures to back us up—because we than on all the weeks worked, including the small weeks, as is also have figures—that women who stay at home more than two currently done in the 25 areas where the pilot projects are not being years are considered as new entrants in the workforce and have to tried out. work 910 hours, according to the regional rate of unemployment, while a regular claimant will have to work between 420 and 700 Thanks to this formula, the cheques for some of the unemployed hours. would not be greatly reduced and those who work very few hours a week would not be penalized. If that is what the Minister of Human Resources Development means by adjustment to labour market realities, he is on the wrong I would like to give a concrete example. A lady who teaches track. adults has a 26 week contract, 35 hours a week at $25 an hour. At the end of her contract, she signs a new one for six weeks at the There are other situations that are just absurd. For example, in same hourly rate, but for only three hours a week. What would the same region, a woman who worked 420 hours is eligible for EI happen? I will show how this lady is penalized. benefits whereas if she were pregnant, she would have to work 700 hours. Before the reform, a woman had to work 300 hours to be Under the current legislation, in an area where there is no pilot eligible for maternity benefits, and now she has to work 700 hours. project, this lady would be entitled to $327 a week, because the last 26 weeks are taken into account, including the six weeks at only three hours a week. So, she is penalized. Some say that this reform helps women, but, on the contrary, I say it does not encourage women to leave their jobs, take care of their children for two years and then go back to work. Knowing Under the plan put forward by the Bloc Quebecois in Bill C-296, how difficult it often is to re-enter the work force, a woman will this lady would have been entitled to $413 a week, because the certainly think twice before leaving it. small weeks would not have been taken into consideration. Before the 1996 reform, that teacher would have got $448 a week, again because the small weeks did not come into play. The EI fund surplus is another irritant. The government is always carrying out studies. I just heard a colleague from the government side say that things must not be rushed, but by not rushing, billions As we can see, the Bloc Quebecois has come up with a balanced of dollars are being accumulated in the employment insurance solution between the reformed EI system as we know it now and fund, at the rate of $6 billion a year, when we know very well that what the old system provided in terms of EI benefits. the government is no longer putting a cent into the fund and that it comes from the pockets of the workers. D (1700) This is why the Bloc Quebecois has called for a separate fund, Previously, maximum insurable earnings were $815 a week, one that is administered outside the control of the Minister of instead of $750, as is the case today. With the small week pilot Human Resources Development. The auditor general is very clear project, a person can receive $406 a week, in the same circum- on this. He says it would not be legal to use contributions for any stances. purpose other than the one set out in the legislation.

The current Employment Insurance Act will thus penalize this What does the government do? It puts the money into the person by $121 a week compared to 1996 levels, by $35 a week consolidated revenue fund, and we know now that those $20 billion compared to the Bloc’s proposal and by $42 compared to the are more or less virtual money. While they are talking about their October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9421

Supply compassion for the unemployed, they are busy piling up the money addition to not contributing to the EI fund, the federal government and carrying out a reform that tightens up eligibility. is preventing even more people from qualifying. This reform is unfair and the eligibility criteria are too restrictive. What the minister is not saying is that fewer and fewer people who contribute qualify for benefits. Now, 38% of contributors have We introduced six bills to improve the system and strike some access. Since the Liberals came along, eligibility has eroded, and sort of balance between the previous and present situations. The fewer and fewer people are eligible for benefits. government is stalling, with answers about how things were before the reform, precisely so that it can rack up billions of dollars on the backs of the unemployed. D (1705) Mrs. Pauline Picard (Drummond, BQ): Madam Speaker, I I find it regrettable that $20 billion are being taken away from want to thank the member for Quebec for her very interesting people in need, with seemingly no concern for what happens to comments and for her work on this issue. them. Today, we agree with the small weeks. The pilot project put in place in a mad panic by this party because no thought was given D (1710) to the impacts the reform would have on people. This pilot project was inaugurated in a mad panic because too many people could not I would like her to remind us of the adverse effects that the EI qualify for employment insurance. reform has had on women. I would like her to repeat the example she gave a few moments ago and explain to us how pregnant We want all regions to have access to this, because it is not only women have been adversely affected by the reform. the high unemployment regions that can benefit from it. We would like to see everyone able to qualify for employment insurance in I would also like her to tell us what the Bloc Quebecois thinks other regions which also have a high unemployment rate. should be done with the EI fund surplus, why that money, which does not belong to the government, should be returned to the Ms. Angela Vautour (Beauséjour—Petitcodiac, NDP): Mad- workers and the employers. am Speaker, I thank the Bloc Quebecois member for her comments. I understand what she said. The situation is the same in my riding. This situation has been strongly criticized throughout Quebec There are more and more people who do not qualify, and those who and Canada. By amending the Employment Insurance Act in order do get very little money. to use the EI fund surplus for other purposes instead of reinvesting it to lighten the workers’ heavy financial burden, the government is practically stealing that money. Today’s motion is justified. It is unfortunate that it is not the Liberals who are prepared to make the necessary changes, because some people are suffering now. We told the government there was a I would like my colleague to comment on that so we can better problem with the act as such. This is very clear. I remember very understand the situation. well phoning Liberal ministers and telling them that one hour would be equal to one insurable week. They told me ‘‘No, do not Mrs. Christiane Gagnon: Madam Speaker, I would need half worry, it is not what you think’’. When the act was implemented, an hour to answer my hon. colleague. What I can say is that, while some employers phoned us to ask what was going on. We are the minister’s objective is to encourage people to get back to work, hurting our workers. that is not what we are seeing in real life. Including small weeks in the calculation of benefits discourages people from going back to work. It is sad to have a government that purposely caused such problems to people who are laid off through no fault of their own. My colleague suggested that women, for instance, be encour- aged to stay at home to raise their kids for two years because they Mrs. Christiane Gagnon: Madam Speaker, I thank my New need 30% to 117% more hours to return to the labour force. Democratic Party colleague for her remarks. Earlier, I heard a Liberal member tell us that the government cannot meet all the Mr. Bernard Bigras (Rosemont, BQ): Madam Speaker, it is needs. But, with $20 billion in the EI fund, a fund that does not never easy to speak after hearing remarks as eloquent as the ones belong to us, and only 38% of those who pay premiums qualifying, made by my colleague from Quebec. I will nevertheless try to my thought is that this government does not want to take action clarify the motion before us today. because it suits it not to do so. It is a pleasure to rise to speak on the important issue of There has been no change in the reform. The matter is being employment insurance reform. For more than two years, we have studied. We know very well that this reform is having a catastroph- been questioning the Minister of Human Resources Development ic impact on the unemployed. Several thousands of people are on about the steady decline in the number of unemployed workers who welfare. Again, the provinces must pick up the pieces because, in qualify for EI benefits. 9422 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Supply All this time the minister claims to be concerned by this tragic We believe however that this motion is not explicit enough, since situation, but does not do a thing to change it. Once again, the it does not specify if the areas involved would only be those where minister is full of good intentions, but does not act on them. It pilot projects are currently under way or all the areas in Canada. is always the same thing on the government side: all talk and very Under the current EI system, only 21 administrative regions out of little action. 54 are affected by the lumping or exclusion of the small weeks. We are convinced that the new formula, whether it be the lumping or the exclusion of the small weeks, should apply throughout Canada. Worse yet, this government is trying to divert—and that is a rather strong word—the $7 billion it has taken—not to say ‘‘stolen’’, for I do not want to use unparliamentary language, But first, I want to say that the government must act quickly although the choice of words is still important—from workers and because the small weeks pilot projects are coming to an end on employers to spend as it pleases. This money does not belong to the November 15. As we all know, the purpose of these projects was to government but to Canadian workers and employers. reduce some of the disincentives and devastating effects of the Employment Insurance Act. In fact, the new legislation unfairly As my colleague from Quebec said very eloquently a moment penalizes those who agree to work small weeks, where they earn ago, the motion before us today concerns specifically an urgently less than $150. needed amendment to the employment insurance plan. It must be recalled that this motion by the Conservative Party reads as I think it is also important to mention, because it not only affects follows: ‘‘That, in the opinion of this House, the government the formula, that these projects were to pacify the employers who should continue with the Employment Insurance Small Weeks were complaining about being unable to find employees ready to Adjustment Projects and amend the legislation in order to make the work small weeks. So, for some time now, some workers have adjustment projects a permanent feature of the Employment Insur- agreed to work small weeks, because they thought the program ance Act.’’ would be renewed. The minister has to set things straight right away and tell us what he intends to do with these projects. If not, he As my colleagues have already said, we in the Bloc Quebecois would be penalizing these workers whom he has kept in the dark, support this motion. We have in fact been calling for essentially the without telling them what he was going to do. same thing for quite some time. My colleague has said that a number of bills have been introduced on this side of the House, but, unfortunately, the government has repeatedly ignored them. Let me remind the House where this program to reduce the effects of the federal government’s drastic cuts in the EI program comes from. Last December, we introduced Bill C-296, one of whose clauses provided a method for resolving the problem of the small weeks. Unfortunately, once again, the government has refused to deal with On March 5, 1997, barely two months after the coming into force it. The opposition has therefore been obliged to use an opposition of his new program, the Minister of Human Resources Develop- day. Yet again, the government is rejecting both the recommenda- ment had to announce adjustment projects to mollify employers tions of the Conservative Party and Bill C-296, which the minister and workers in areas where unemployment rates were very high, should frequently refer to. The Liberal government must pass this including eastern Quebec and the maritimes. This admission of amendment as quickly as possible in order to repair one of the failure was the sign of his lack of vision and understanding of the many inequities it has caused with its reform. impacts of a reform crafted mainly to save billions of dollars at the expense of the unemployed.

D (1715) The main problem, already mentioned by the Bloc Quebecois, is the disincentive to work. A worker who accepts to work a few I will first explain what the small weeks adjustment projects are. hours a week for a while, combining small and big workweeks, will Then I will explain why it is vital to make these pilot projects into a probably be penalized financially the next time he puts in a claim. standard that will be universally applied. Finally, I will explain This is due to the new way benefits are calculated. how the government is trying to hide behind a commissioned analysis in order to justify its inaction in this matter. Suppose a worker in eastern Quebec works 20 big weeks at $450 a week, and six small weeks at $60, for a total of 26 weeks and an Currently, the Employment Insurance Act includes a new meth- income of $9,360. Now he will have to make do on $198 a week. od for calculating benefits, which penalizes claimants by calculat- ing a lower benefit amount. This method also discourages people from working who might otherwise be working a limited number of Before the reform, he would have been entitled to $248 a week, hours and weeks. This problem particularly affects high unemploy- and to $245 under the pilot project. In Quebec, 13.7%, that is ment areas and some categories of workers, mainly the young and nearly 14%, of people who lost their job have worked at least one the women. small week. This rate is much higher in the maritimes and eastern October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9423

Supply Quebec. It is 24% in eastern Quebec and in the Chicoutimi—Jon- It is as if we had paid insurance premiums, but were told ‘‘We quière area. will not pay you’’, after a fire in the house. That is unacceptable. It is an exclusion clause and a discriminatory clause that affects not D (1720) only young people and women, but entire regions and thousands of Quebeckers and Canadians. There are reportedly 25,000 persons in this situation in Mon- Some hon. members: Oh, Oh. treal, which represents 11.8%. Women are more likely to be in this group: 22.7% compared to 5.5% of men. Young people are also Mr. Bernard Bigras: I hear the members opposite reacting to affected: 17.2%, or almost 18 of young people under age 30, as my words; clearly they do not come from regions hard hit by opposed to 8% of people over age 30. unemployment.

I think these figures are self-explanatory. The federal govern- D (1725) ment has tightened EI eligibility criteria to such an extent that it is making young people and women pay for the debt with premiums They are certainly not from the regions excluded, whose constit- they pay to protect themselves from unemployment. This misap- uents are excluded, by the plan. In this regard, I agree entirely with propriation of funds is unacceptable and the government must what the member for Beauséjour—Petitcodiac said. Many people agree now with today’s motion. in my riding have told me of the pitiful state of this plan. Mr. Pierre de Savoye (Portneuf, BQ): Mr. Speaker, I would Ms. Angela Vautour (Beauséjour—Petitcodiac, NDP): Mad- like to point out something about EI that completely stunned and am Speaker, once again I would like to thank my colleague from staggered me. the Bloc. Employers must pay their share to the EI fund. All businesses When we listen to these speeches, we realize that what is must pay. It is not only the employees who pay. The Government of happening in Quebec and the Atlantic provinces, in terms of Quebec is an employer and, as such, its share exceeds the real unemployment insurance, is much the same. I think I will call it by needs, so it contributes to reducing the federal deficit to the tune of its real name, even though the name was changed to ‘‘employment $200 million a year. insurance’’ to try to convince people they will find a job, despite the fact that the Liberal government will not make an effort to I would like my colleague to comment on that. create jobs. Mr. Bernard Bigras: Mr. Speaker, this is the whole issue of the surpluses. I know that I do not have much time to answer, but I will I would like to know if my colleague encounters the same try to do it quickly. problems as I do in his riding. I receive calls from people concerning their cheques. A lady called me yesterday and said ‘‘I Employers and employees contribute every year to a program, think the employment centre has made an error in my calculation. I but cannot get benefits. For us, that is unacceptable. In the past, have worked more than 20 weeks, but it only calculated six weeks. before the reform, more than 75% of young unemployed people My cheque is only for $60 a week; I cannot live on that. I think it could claim UI benefits. made a mistake’’. I told her no, it did not make a mistake. It added the famous divider of the 26 week period to make the calculation. I I will conclude with a question: What percentage of young even received calls from people getting $32 a week. unemployed can now claim EI benefits under the new system? Only 25%. I would like to know if my colleague from the Bloc receives the [English] same type of complaints in his region. Mr. Hec Clouthier (Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, Lib.): Mr. Bernard Bigras: Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague Mr. Speaker, it is indeed a pleasure for me to speak to this motion from Beauséjour—Petitcodiac for her questions. Her questions are brought forward by the hon. member for Madawaska—Resti- always well founded. gouche.

I remember last week’s debate on APEC. The question was very It will please members to no end to know that I will be sharing much to the point, and it enabled me to inform the House of the my time with the hardworking vivacious member for Guelph— Canadian federation on APEC. Wellington. I have a speech which took me hours to prepare, but basically I Yes indeed we are getting calls at the office. Why? Because this am going to touch on a few nuances brought forward by some of government must understand immediately that the employment the members opposite, in particular members of the Reform Party. insurance reform and the new employment insurance legislation serve to exclude and to discriminate against young people and It is interesting to note that in the weekend’s paper it was clearly women, in particular. The Bloc Quebecois considers it unaccept- evinced that one of the members of the Reform Party, I believe the able to have contributions paid into a plan that denies benefits. I member for Medicine Hat, practises some of his dialogue before think this must be said loud and clear. speaking in the House of Commons. Other members of the Reform 9424 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Supply Party perhaps better take a look in the mirror before they start We have actually done it. We have the lowest unemployment rate making disparaging remarks about this piece of legislation and now in about eight years. condemn it in its entirety for the simple reason that they say it is isolationist and it targets one part of the country, which is absolute- Another thing that is great for business and will help the ly and unequivocally a falsehood. employment picture is that we have the lowest interest rates in over 30 years. They are indulging in nothing more than verbal turpitude. They are the people who want at the end of the day to speak for all I am a business person besides. When I had a real job I was in Canadians, whereas this piece of legislation basically does address business, until I got elected as a member of parliament. I see what all Canadians. One member said it does not reach into his riding goes on here on occasion. It is dreadful. Let us face reality. If there because he has 17% unemployment in his riding. If he has 17% are low interest rates which we currently have, the lowest in over unemployment in his riding and he wants to rail against the 30 years, it is very propitious for the job sector. That is one of the government, he better look inward and say perhaps there is reasons we have the lowest unemployment. It is now down to about something he personally should do to alleviate those concerns. 8.4%. When we took over in 1993 I believe it was something around 12.4%. That in itself propagates that the unemployment In this piece of legislation when we talk about the big weeks and picture will look better. the small weeks, we are actually looking for a formula to address unemployment. To get back to this piece of legislation, I agree a lot with what the hon. member for Madawaska—Restigouche has been saying, but I We on the government side do not look upon unemployment cannot say to him at this stage, today, here and now, that I am in favourably. We are trying to do everything we possibly can to complete agreement with him on this issue because it is a pilot ameliorate the situation and address the concerns. project.

D (1730) We will take a look at it on November 15. The hon. member should hold his horses, or perhaps I should say to him sharpen his blades. He has already told me that he is a hockey player. I believe When we look at the big weeks I think of the word big and my he is skating on thin ice on this one. He should get his skates hon. colleague from Pontiac—Gatineau—Labelle. He is big in sharpened because we on this side have sharpened our pencils. That heart and big in empathy for those who are dispossessed and those is why the employment picture is at the best it has been for years who are out of work. When we look at the small weeks I think of and years and years. the word small and the member for Frontenac—Mégantic. I know the fourth party, the NDP, is very concerned about the [Translation] unemployment picture. Its members are very eloquent spokesper- sons in that regard. However I disagree with them. I do not believe I think he is not here, but his ideas are not very great. that we should have generations and generations of people on unemployment. I would like to see these people get job retraining [English] and upgrading. I believe they agree with me in that regard, but that is where they viscerally disagree with the Reform Party because the He has a small vision of the country. He is from the Bloc Reform Party’s agenda is to cut them off. Anybody who has come Quebecois Party which does not really care about the rest of the back year in and year out to the employment insurance fund would country. Everyone knows that it is an isolationist party. Dare I say be arbitrarily cut off. The NDP agrees with the Liberal Party in the that the opposition party, the Reform Party, in some instances also area of job retraining. delves into the realm of being isolationist because it does not want to address the entire situation. We look after our students. We have the youth employment centre programs which are generated with the money from employ- ment insurance premiums. Everyone would like to see a reduction, I know my hon. colleague opposite is a business person. He but at what expense? The finance minister has clearly indicated that knows that the best way to alleviate unemployment is to have a we are a caring, compassionate country. We will reach out to all strong, vibrant economy. I know the hon. member, the little fellow sectors of the population to try to help them. from Medicine Hat who has certain Thespian qualities about him, has said that they would create in the blue book about one million jobs by the year 2000. I believe that is their mandate. D (1735)

All of Canada knows that we on this side of the House have Some people think employment insurance is a fund but it is not. already reached that point. We have created about 1.3 million jobs It goes into the general revenue fund. That was passed in 1986. I and growing, less than two years faster than the Reform Party was not here in 1986. I do not know who was here then but I suggested. Talk is cheap. It is easy to say what one is going to do. believe that is when it was passed. October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9425

Supply We have managed that fund remarkably well. I remember back In conclusion, I would remind the member that the Auditor in the early 1980s when the unemployment insurance fund was General of Canada said that, if the federal government used the running at a deficit of about $500 million a year. Now, because we money for anything other than unemployment, administration costs have a surplus and because we are managing it extremely well, we and training expenses, it would be illegal. Right now, the federal are to be penalized and we are to be looked upon in a pejorative government is receiving interest on the EI fund and it would illegal manner. I emphatically state we will not apologize for managing for it to use it elsewhere. that fund extremely well, better than it has been managed in years. Mr. Hec Clouthier: Mr. Speaker, I am very surprised and I know the member for Medicine Hat likes to get involved in astonished at the comments of the member opposite. Shakespeare. Alfred Lord Tennyson said: Come, my friends. Does he think that government members are not serious minded? ‘T is not too late to seek a newer world. We are indeed, but you are not, because the former Bloc Quebecois Push off, and sitting well in order smite leader said that Canada was not a real country. The sounding furrows; for my purpose holds To sail beyond the sunset, and the baths Of all the western stars, until I die. [English] It may be that the gulfs will wash us down; It may be we shall touch the Happy Isles, And see the great Achilles, whom we knew. It is not real. Your leader said that, so what are you talking about Tho’ much is taken, much abides; and tho’ over there? We are not now that strength which in old days Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are,— One equal temper of heroic hearts, D (1740 ) Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield. The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): I would again remind That is what the Liberal Party of Canada will do. We will strive members to address each other through the Chair. to find resolutions to the unemployment issue. We will seek the solutions in good Liberal policies. We will find a way to help all Ms. Angela Vautour (Beauséjour—Petitcodiac, NDP): Mr. people throughout the country because that is the Liberal tradition. Speaker, I saw the member getting upset just a minute ago. I am a little concerned because I have to give credit where credit is due. [Translation] Definitely the Bloc has been fighting, like the NDP has been Mr. Paul Crête (Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup—Témis- fighting, to try to bring justice to this program which has been couata—Les Basques, BQ): Mr. Speaker, we are talking about a destroyed by the Liberal government. The member has talked about serious matter today. This is no time for fooling around. how well they manage and how proud they are of what they have achieved. What they have achieved is the creation of the biggest The issue of small weeks does not affect people who are gap ever between the rich and the poor. unemployed in the usual manner. It affects those who work for a living every week that they have a job, for 20, 24, 25 or 26 weeks a They sit there and are happy about it and so proud that they year. managed. I can manage my finances very well at home. I can save 50% of my money if I want to starve my two kids. I can be very If the system is not extended, a person earning $450 a week for proud that I have money in the bank. I get upset when I see 20 weeks and $60 a week for six small weeks will receive benefits members of parliament saying that they are proud of the surplus. of $198, instead of the $245 the program now allows. Yet they do not talk about the hardship they have created for the people and for the community. This is no joking matter. We are talking about salaries of $20,000 or $25,000 a year. Only people completely cut off from reality This is not just a seasonal worker problem. It is a community would laugh at such a situation. This is not a case of asking people problem created by the Liberal government that is so proud of this to become more eligible. We are asking that benefits be reasonable, surplus. I do not understand it. because the cost of this system for one year represents one half of 1% of the surplus in the fund. Mr. Hec Clouthier: Mr. Speaker, I would like the member An hon. member: Oh, oh. opposite to understand this, and I will make it very clear and very plain to you. We have reduced— Mr. Paul Crête: I would like the member to listen to what I am saying and take this a little more seriously. The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): Make it plain to everybody but make it plain through the Chair. Could he not ask his party to devote one half of 1% of the $20 billion surplus in the fund to maintain a program that has been Mr. Hec Clouthier: Mr. Speaker, we have reduced the employ- around for two years? ment insurance premiums not once, not twice, not thrice but four 9426 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Supply times. We have managed that fund very well. We have reduced while the person is looking for work. The idea is to get unem- unemployment from 12.4% to 8.4%. ployed workers to use EI as temporary income support while looking for a new job or upgrading their skills so they can return to I remind the hon. member opposite through you, Mr. Speaker, the workforce as quickly as possible. that I suffered through an NDP government in the province of Ontario, and let me say that it was not a pretty sight. It is a travesty The new EI system has been restructured and redesigned to be to see that Ontario’s Bob Rae was named man of the year for more inclusive. For example, a number of those who are taking part creating jobs in Buffalo. in the small weeks project also receive the family income supple- ment, a supplement introduced by this government to address the We are doing what has to be done to alleviate the difficulties needs of Canadians who may be living in poverty. A $50 floor on with employment insurance premiums. We are doing a remarkable earnings also applies to low income earners so that these workers job. I appreciate the comments of the hon. member opposite, but can earn more while still receiving EI benefits. Workers with an deep down where it really counts I know she agrees with our policy annual income of less than $2,000 also have their premium in this regard. payments refunded and are eligible to participate in active employ- ment measures. Mrs. Brenda Chamberlain (Parliamentary Secretary to Min- ister of Labour, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for The reform of the EI system has benefited many people. EI is Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke for his eloquent comments. I now more accessible to women. Close to 700,000 women who think they were most interesting. work part time now have their EI payments refunded and because every paid hour of work counts the 14 hour job trap women used to I rise in the House today to take part in this extremely important find themselves in under UI has been lifted. debate on the employment insurance system. I am pleased the hon. member for Madawaska—Restigouche has brought the motion The small weeks adjustment project is just one example of how before the House. It gives the government the opportunity to help the Department of Human Resources Development is responding to Canadians understand why it was necessary to reform the old the changing labour market. unemployment insurance income support system.

The hon. member’s motion specifically addresses the small Today very few people stay at the same job for more than 10 weeks adjustment projects. These pilots have served as an added years. The average person changes careers, not just jobs, five times incentive for workers to take any employment, even for a few extra between the time they finish school and the time they retire. hours. That is the thrust behind the new EI program to ensure that every hour of work counts toward eligibility for benefits and to People have to be flexible and willing to adapt to new work encourage people to work as much as possible. environments and working conditions. The good old 9 to 5 does not apply to every job. Some people work 40 hours a week while others I think that is very important. I do not have a problem with the work at two or three part time jobs or are employed casually on a small weeks adjustment projects per se. They are an important day by day basis. means of helping seasonal and cyclical workers, a means of making the system a little more fair. However, I do not think that small This is why small weeks adjustment projects can be so benefi- weeks adjustment projects should continue in their current form cial. I would like to ask the minister to consider the advisability of indefinitely. seeing the project standardized and nationalized.

As the hon. member knows, these projects are being carried out As the member of parliament for Guelph—Wellington, a riding in 29 high unemployment regions. While I understand the need for representing a high number of construction workers, I use the these projects in these areas, I would ask the minister to consider construction industry as an example. A construction worker may the advisability of making them less regional and applying them work 40 hours one week and 20 hours another week. Construction more evenly across our great country. is not a 9 to 5, Monday to Friday industry. Workers work until the job is done be that on a Monday, Wednesday, Saturday or any other Employment insurance is an important part of our social safety day of the week. When the worker gets laid off, somewhat of an net. I emphasis the word employment because I think the change inevitable occurrence in this profession, and if they choose to apply from unemployment to employment insurance was an important for EI their benefits are calculated on their last 20 weeks of work. one. Let us take a mason who has worked 40 hours a week for 6 D (1745 ) months on a construction week then during the last 20 weeks of the project the nature of the work changes and his hours are cut back to This program was never intended to make being jobless easy but 30 years for 5 weeks and then 20 hours for the next 5 weeks. The rather to tide the person over between jobs and to act as a buffer amount of EI the mason is now eligible to collect will be October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9427

Supply considerably smaller due to those small weeks. That does not seem to commit to renewing them without first assessing their impact very fair to me. and the effectiveness in the regions in which they will be imple- mented, then taking a serious look at where else they could be of The small weeks adjustment projects were implemented for benefit to all Canadians. situations like this one, the ones we have in Guelph—Wellington. However, we cannot access this project. In practice they have only As I mentioned, Canada is considered the best country in the been developed in certain regions of the country. world when it comes to our standard of living. Our social safety net is a big reason why. Canadians look out for one another in times of Employment insurance is part of Canada’s social fabric and a need. Whether the hardship is caused by a national disaster, illness reason why Canada is ranked number one by the United Nations in or unemployment it is important to help our fellow Canadians terms of our standard of living. It is the Canadian way to help wherever they are, wherever they live. others in need. Charity and community spirit are two identifying features of our national psyche. I understand that unemployment is higher in certain regions of the country, but we also have to look at the unemployment levels by industry to ensure we are helping as many Canadians as possible When Quebec was devastated by flooding a few years ago and helping them equally. That is what being Canadian is all about. Canadians from every region responded. Even though Quebeckers did not want to be a part of this country Canadians went there and responded because they are Canadians, Canadians who live in [Translation] Quebec. Mr. Jean-Guy Chrétien (Frontenac—Mégantic, BQ): Mr. A year later when the Red River overflowed people in every Speaker, I think my distinguished colleague is totally disconnected province and territory reached out to the people of Manitoba. Just from human reality in this country. She must surely live in a posh last year when the ice storm struck Ontario and Quebec citizens neighbourhood, and she probably does not meet her voters in the from my riding of Guelph—Wellington and communities like ours places where she should. everywhere responded immediately to the call for help in Quebec again. In 1997, Quebec paid $475 million more than it received. Federalists can no longer use the argument they relied on in 1980, when they tried to scare people by saying ‘‘We cannot separate I see that Bloc members are laughing because other Canadians from the rest of Canada, or else we will lose access to the responded to their needs. I think that is a terrible thing. It is very unemployment insurance program’’. sad that the Bloc Quebecois responds by laughing and mocking. The hon. member spoke about poverty. I would like to know Given this track record of helping our fellow citizens, no matter what she thinks of the people in my riding who work as volunteer where they live, it does not make sense to help unemployed firefighters. These people clean fire trucks, hoses, etc., on a workers in one region of the country more than in another region. volunteer basis. The fifteen or so volunteer firefighters in Black Lake spend hours of their free time doing that work and maintain- D (1750 ) ing a volunteer firefighters unit in the community.

All hon. members agree we have a responsibility to do every- When they fight a fire, they are paid $14 or $15 per hour. There thing within our power to help Canadians and their families avoid is a volunteer fireman who helped fight 12 fires. He suffered a poverty and its traumatic effects. shortfall of $1,534. Because he earned $526, the government knocked $1,534 off his benefits. This is a volunteer fireman who does volunteer work and who contributed $1,534 to the $20 billion I believe the small weeks adjustment projects are an important accumulated surplus. Is this what we mean by poverty? addition to the employment insurance system. I would like to see them continue, but nationally as well as regionally. The govern- ment knew that some regions had higher unemployment rates and This government is taxing poor people to death in order to lower that EI reform would impact some communities more than others. its deficit. EI contributions are too high, given the benefits paid by However, labour market conditions are changing everywhere and the government to the unemployed. small weeks is a problem encountered by EI applicants across the country. This is a problem that needs to be addressed. [English]

It is my understanding that the government is now analysing the Mrs. Brenda Chamberlain: Mr. Speaker, it is hard for me to sit projects to determine what action may be required. The govern- across from the Bloc Quebecois and listen to this. ment is close to being able to make a decision on the future of the small weeks adjustment projects experiment. These projects are Quebec derives many things from Canada because it is a scheduled to be completed on November 15. It would be premature Canadian province. It willingly take everything from us. When the 9428 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Supply ice storm happened, and the flooding, it took all the things that not a happy one at home. Unemployment insurance is always a Guelph—Wellington brought to it. It took them gladly. subject of sadness for us.

In the Atlantic region, as in my riding of Beauséjour—Petitco- D (1755) diac, many people are suffering as the result of cuts to EI made by our famous Liberal government. But here Bloc members sit. They mock and they laugh. They do not represent all of Canada here. If they truly believed what they As I keep saying, this is the government whose Prime Minister are saying they would not sit as members of parliament because campaigned in my riding, making promise after promise, saying they do not represent Canada. They should be representing provin- that he would scrap the GST, that he would make sure seasonal cially if that is what they believe. But they do not believe that. They workers did not have to worry about managing to live in our take everything from Canada— regions. The people believed him. They elected him. And this is the thanks we get. We have not forgotten it. [Translation] There is a lot of sadness. As I said earlier, I got another call last Mr. Jean-Guy Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. night, from a woman who said ‘‘I think the employment centre has I want to point out that I was elected democratically in the riding of made a mistake. They did a calculation and included only the past Frontenac—Mégantic, just like the Liberal member opposite, and I six weeks, the money from the past six weeks, although I worked must represent— 26 weeks’’. She ended up with just about nothing.

[English] At the same time, we have Liberal members who say they are very proud of themselves, that there is a $20 billion surplus. They are proud of the way they managed the account, but they do not say The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): That is a point of a thing about the suffering there is everywhere. debate and both sides have their oars in the water. We have a minute and a bit left for questions and comments. D (1800) Mr. Jim Pankiw (Saskatoon—Humboldt, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, sometimes it is unfortunate that we are limited in time. The More and more people are living in poverty. Mothers come to me member for Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke stated that the EI and say ‘‘It’s not just a problem for the seasonal workers. It’s a fund had been very well managed by the Liberal government. That community problem’’. They have taken $927 million out of the is exactly what he said. New Brunswick economy since the cuts, and the government is as proud as punch of having done so.

My opinion is that a $19 billion surplus which does not exist We will not have the opportunity to see the Minister of Human because it has been spent is atrocious management. Resources Development come to our region and face these prob- lems. He does not have the gumption to do so, because he is not I wonder if the member for Guelph—Wellington would agree capable of looking the poverty and misery he has created in the that misappropriation of $19 billion is very good management as face. He is not the one getting calls to his office. I am sure he is stated by the member for Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke. never there. In my opinion, he is not even aware of what is going on, three-quarters of the time. Mrs. Brenda Chamberlain: Mr. Speaker, the Reform Party that wants to privatize the plan and that does not wish to help other I would really like to see him go to northern New Brunswick, to individual across the country or even help its own citizens in the Kent and Albert County, to face the reality of employment ridings it represents continually tries to look at the dark side. insurance reform. The government has found the path to the pot of Reformers do not want to lift people up. They do not want to help gold, and now it can boast it has paid off the deficit. Very proud of their fellow human beings. themselves they are, those Liberals. The only ones who should be proud are the workers. They are the ones who paid off the deficit. Nobody else. The Reform Party says that it wants us to be fiscally responsible. Nineteen billion dollars should be fiscally responsible, should it not? We had the Prime Minister come to tell us he was going to ‘‘scrap the GST’’. What was the outcome of that? An additional 15% on electricity bills, an additional 15% of workers on unem- [Translation] ployment, an additional 15% on the cost of children’s clothing, while employment insurance cheques are cut at the same time. Ms. Angela Vautour (Beauséjour—Petitcodiac, NDP): Mr. Then people wonder why there is more violence in our communi- Speaker, I must say I was really wanted to speak today. I must also ties. They blame it on the parents: broken homes, some other say that this is a sad moment, because the subject of the debate is problem. October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9429

Supply We know the source of the problems. They have been right in their kid’s lunch at school the next day. The members opposite front of me for over a year. That is the problem. never talk about this. No, because most of them are rich. They know nothing about being hungry. They need to learn what it is to be hungry. I cannot imagine that members on the other side can say they are proud of the society they are creating. At home, in an area where there had never been a bank robbery, there were three in four days [English] in the county of Kent. There was one in a store in Bouctouche last week. These things did not happen at all two years ago. I want to talk about Albert county. People in Albert county which is an hour’s drive from Moncton need the same amount of hours as We used to have a program that had been established to share the someone working in Moncton. They are down to 18 weeks for the wealth. Now we have another problem. Some children go to school benefit period. I have workers who will be out of employment hungry. Why? Their parents are poor. We do not find a poor child if insurance in January. Those are the workers who qualified. Many his parents are not poor. are not going to qualify at all because they need the same amount of hours as someone living in Moncton and the minister says this is The government brags about that fact it has created many jobs. It good. We have proved to the minister a number of times that he is never talks about the jobs that it has cut, the jobs that were lost, the wrong. His arguments do not stand up. He needs to change it. A lot jobs that will be lost with bank mergers. We do not hear about those of people in Albert county are suffering because the Liberal things. government does not want to admit that it makes mistakes. It is making mistakes that are costing lives. How many people are committing suicide because of their difficulties? We do not hear about the women who were penalized. The Liberal member said a few moments ago that part time workers with three or four jobs now qualify for EI. That is good for urban We also have to talk about the unfair accusations of fraud areas, but it does not do much for rural communities where finding because people make a mistake on the form. Even though the even one part time job is difficult. Those people pay EI premiums Canada employment centre has not paid them one penny, if they but never qualify, while the Liberals keep playing with numbers. happen to not put the right amount on their form they will be Those people pay thousands and thousands of dollars in premiums, charged with fraud. Someone explain that to me. This was drawn to but they are not eligible. A distinction must be made. my attention on Friday.

And what about women who are no longer eligible for maternity People opened a claim, did the waiting period, kept their claim benefits? Before the reform, they had to work 300 hours to be open, reported their hours and earnings, reported an amount and the eligible. Now, they have to work 700 hours. What is good for Canada employment centre did not give them an EI cheque. If there women in that program? Nothing. Part time workers in education is a discrepancy, even though the government has not paid them a are also affected. Some of them no longer qualify. In the past, if cent, they are accused of fraud and have to pay the difference they did not qualify, at least they did not have to contribute. between what they actually made and what they reported. It is Nowadays, they must contribute, but they do not qualify. The same armed robbery. That is attacking the unemployed, attacking honest goes for health care workers. people who could make a mistake. A lot of honest people are being accused of fraud. This has got to stop. The famous dividing factor must also be discussed. They are saying: ‘‘Yes, people can qualify with 10 work weeks, as long as It is time to wake up. There is a lot of legislation out there. We they have the required number of hours worked. People can qualify have to wake up and show the Liberals that this cannot continue. with six work weeks, as long as they have the required number of There is just too much poverty. hours worked’’. However, they forget to mention that, in their regions, the number is to be divided by 14. In other regions, it is [Translation] divided by 18. And then the benefits will be calculated over 26 weeks. Mr. Paul Crête (Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup—Témis- I get calls from people who receive cheques for $32, $65 or $85, couata—Les Basques, BQ): Mr. Speaker, I just figured out why and I see Liberal members standing up to congratulate themselves. the hon. member for Beauséjour—Petitcodiac got elected. She has become a seasoned speaker but, more importantly, she is a person who tells the truth, who describes what is going on in her region, D (1805) who has heart and tells it like it is in this House.

I would be ashamed if I had approved a decision that caused so There is a message in there for the Liberal majority. This much misery. So many children hear their parents arguing at night member defeated Dominic LeBlanc, the son of the Governor about where they will find the money, the $2 they need to pay for General of Canada. In the neighbouring riding, Doug Young, the 9430 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Supply sponsor of this EI reform, was also defeated. I think these two men First of all I would like to bring greetings from the hon. member personify the Liberal Party’s arrogance in the maritimes. for Acadie—Bathurst who unfortunately could not be here today.

We will not rewrite history, but I would nonetheless call upon the It appears that this motion at the outset seems to be an act of members who will participate in the vote on this motion tonight or desperation. Because of all the changes to the EI legislation since tomorrow to think it through, especially those living in high the Liberals got into power, this is the kind of motion one has to unemployment regions, as well as any member with constituents figure out. who, as a result of the small weeks program, receive ridiculously low benefits that are practically impossible to live on. The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): I am sorry for inter- rupting but I first needed to be assured that both the member for Beauséjour—Petitcodiac and the member for Sackville—Eastern At the same time, they hear that there is a $20 billion surplus in Shore were splitting their time. I thought that had been made clear the EI fund, that running the small weeks program costs between but I was not sure. $100 million and $125 million a year, or 0.5% of this surplus, and that the government is responsible for the increased poverty across Mr. Peter Stoffer: Mr. Speaker, earlier today in the debate the Canada. I think they get the message. Minister of Human Resources Development said that he has not yet come up with a decision about the issue, but it is only three weeks If they do not send a clear message to the contrary very soon, the away. We need a decision within three weeks. I should remind the Liberals will pay the political price, and deservedly so. House that one of those weeks we will not be here.

D (1810) I have a feeling that typically, like the government did with the TAGS program, it will announce the program when we are not in the House to debate it properly. This is where things should be Ms. Angela Vautour: Mr. Speaker, I agree that we should be debated, in the House right here in Ottawa. clear. The pilot project has to go on, and the legislation needs to be amended. If you think we have a poverty problem now, just I want to talk about the Reform Party for just a moment. Every imagine what it will be like if the government decides not to extend time we talk about EI concerns or anything of that nature, the pilot project. Reformers very quickly switch the debate to tax breaks but not once do we hear them talk about a reduction of the GST-HST. All Some people work part time all winter long. It is not true that they wish to talk about is taking EI funds from workers and these people all end up in the tavern drinking all winter long. That employers so their corporate friends can enjoy further tax breaks. was what the Prime Minister said, and he was quite pleased with They want to take that money from workers and employers. himself, when he came back here. These people work during the winter when they get a chance. If the pilot project disappears, these The remarkable thing is that the Reform Party constantly talks people will be penalized. I cannot understand a government that about Atlantic Canada as if it were a basket case. I am from goes on stomping on people who are in dire straits. It is the only Atlantic Canada and it is not a basket case. The fact is we have thing it can think of. some very serious problems. We have some very serious concerns, but as everyone knows after the Swissair disaster, Atlantic Cana- Keeping the pilot project alive is not enough. We also need a dians and especially Nova Scotians are some of the finest people in comprehensive review of the program. Some employers have come the entire country. Atlantic Canada is not a basket case. to realize this. They have started calling us on the phone and they tell us: ‘‘Employees are being penalized. I cannot hire workers Shortly after the last EI reductions were brought in last year by anymore, and I do not blame them’’. People are getting cheques as the finance minister and the human resources minister, I think to low as $65 right now. If the pilot project disappeared overnight, the tune of $1.4 billion, the finance minister went to Halifax to they would get big weekly cheques of $5. speak to the chamber of commerce. They said that he had not reduced it enough and that he should have given them a further reduction in EI premiums. The finance minister in his wisdom said I cannot believe we have to fight the government over this, ‘‘If I reduce it another 20 cents, how many jobs would you people because we have all the evidence we need. We are told to wait for create tomorrow?’’ The entire chamber of commerce was silent. the reports, to wait for the studies. Send the Minister of Human They could not guarantee one extra job if the EI premiums were Resources Development to our region, and he will get his report. reduced another 20 cents. They could not do it. Yet the Reform Party stands here with its right wing policies and says that if EI [English] premiums were reduced, all these jobs would be created.

Mr. Peter Stoffer (Sackville—Eastern Shore, NDP): Mr. D (1815 ) Speaker, I was hoping that everybody in the country could listen to that. Then they could understand exactly what goes on when we I would like to tell the Reform Party that if it wants to give tax fool around with the EI concerns. breaks to people, then reduce the GST and the HST. That would be October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9431

Adjournment Debate the biggest job creator for every single Canadian in this country when Basque sailors first set up camp on Nova Scotia’s shores, from coast to coast to coast. Canso has been known as the hub of the commercial fishery.

We never hear Reform Party members talk about reports or In more recent years, despite the overall downturn trend in the objective concerns from labour. They never discuss the concerns Atlantic fishery, the Seafreez company has been operating a that come out of the CLC, the CAW, the PSAC or the FFAW. processing plant in Canso in which a number of species are utilized. The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): I am very sorry to interrupt, but the time has expired. I am pleased to highlight that it was through the efforts of former It being 6.15 p.m., pursuant to order made earlier today, the Progressive Conservative governments, both federally and provin- question is deemed put and a recorded division deemed requested cially, that Seafreez commenced operations in Canso. and deferred until Tuesday, October 27, 1998 at the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders. To cut right to the chase, the Canso Trawlermen’s Co-op has developed a proposal in conjunction with Seafreez to catch an additional 2,200 tonnes of northern shrimp out of the additional ______7,000 that the Government of Canada was planning to allocate this spring.

ADJOURNMENT PROCEEDINGS The Minister of Fisheries and Oceans denied the application from Canso, as he did for three similar applications from Nova Scotia ridings, including the riding of Bras d’Or. The minister’s [English] trite answer at that time was ‘‘The fish come first’’.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed While nobody would take away from the importance of con- to have been moved. servation, least of all the Canso Trawlermen’s Co-op, the fact is that the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans decided to allocate every single additional tonne of northern shrimp quota to Newfoundland FISHERIES and Labrador, pitting two regions in the country against one another. Mr. Peter MacKay (Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, PC): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak tonight on an issue of Nothing was given to Nova Scotia. Nothing was given to a grave importance to my riding of Pictou—Antigonish—Guysbo- community that has nearly 500 years of tradition at stake within the rough and, in particular, Guysborough county. fisheries. So much for Liberal fisheries policy that is based on fairness and equity. It is an issue that I have vigorously pursued with the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans through personal interventions, correspon- I do not know whether fish actually come first with the Minister dence and, as well, through statements and questions in this House. of Fisheries and Oceans, but I do know who comes last with this minister and that is the people of Nova Scotia and, most notably, The issue is this Liberal government’s continued refusal to work those of Canso. with the fishery workers in communities such as Canso and Mulgrave to ensure that these communities remain economically viable. The Canso Trawlermen’s Co-op has made more than 50 requests to meet personally with the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans. They Although the government’s treatment of Mulgrave and ACS want to advance their cause. They want to put a face to the Trading has been extremely disgraceful, I am going to focus my disastrous consequences of the minister’s decision. They even comments tonight on the community of Canso and, in particular, on travelled all the way from Canso to Ottawa so they would have a the efforts of the Canso Trawlermen’s Co-op which has been chance to meet with the minister, but did not get a chance to meet championed by Pat Fougere. with him.

This is an extremely timely adjournment debate because this Did he have the courage to meet with them face to face? No. I coming Saturday there is a large public meeting taking place in have repeatedly urged the minister to meet with them in Canso and Canso on the future of the fishery in that community. again his answer has been no. Even the premier of Nova Scotia, a former colleague of the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, has Canso is the birthplace of the modern era fishing industry. I say asked the minister to meet with the co-op. Again his answer was this out of respect for our First Nations fishermen. Since 1504 no. 9432 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998

Adjournment Debate It is further proof that the current premier of Nova Scotia has no of adjacency, with access based on the department’s sector man- clout with his former Liberal friends and is therefore of no great agement policy which governs the access of inshore vessels. use or advantage to Nova Scotia. [Translation] Who does the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans think he is when he will not show the decency to meet with hard-working people like those from Canso? Pat Fougere of the Canso Trawlermen’s MILLENNIUM SCHOLARSHIPS Co-op said that the minister demonstrated complete disrespect for the area’s fishermen and that he must take responsibility for the Mr. Paul Crête (Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup—Témis- slow death of the fishing community in Canso. couata—Les Basques, BQ): Mr. Speaker, on May 8, 1998, I asked the Deputy Prime Minister a question. He answered that there were Pat Fougere is absolutely right. ongoing negotiations about the millennium scholarships. In partic- ular, he said, and I quote: D (1820 ) We are trying to arrive at an agreement to co-operate with the provincial government, and our negotiations are continuing. As I said, there will be a meeting in Canso on November 1. Members of the provincial government, representatives of DFO We know today that all that was simply a smoke screen, and that and other community leaders will be present. I urge and challenge the federal government, at the urging of the Prime Minister, had the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans to have the courage and the decided that the millennium scholarships would be established in guts to show up at that meeting and tell these people to their faces spite of the opposition: against the wishes of the Quebec govern- what their future will be if his decisions are not changed in the near ment, against the wishes of the Quebec student federations, against future. the wishes of the Canadian student and university federations, which today still ask that they be turned into something else. Mr. Wayne Easter (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I am aware and I fully Two and a half billion dollars were set aside for the millennium understand the concerns of some Nova Scotia communities with scholarships. Quebec’s share is thus some $600 million. At the respect to their lack of fishing opportunities. However, this is not same time, transfers to the provinces were cut. just a Nova Scotia phenomenon. Every year DFO receives many requests for access to various fisheries from people in similar Quebec has the best student loans and scholarships system in situations. The total allowable catch, TAC, increases in the north- Canada. That is recognised by all the players. In fact, it is the only ern shrimp fishery announced in May 1998 were allocated accord- system where scholarships are given based on financial need. There ing to principles which were developed for the Department of are also loans that are provided based on financial need. Fisheries and Oceans, stakeholders, the Atlantic provinces and Quebec to ensure that the benefits of the fishery were shared in as As for the Canadian system, it provided loans only. This has fair and open manner as possible. created a much higher debt load for Canadian students. In Quebec, there is a consensus that this $600 million should be reinvested in As one of these principles is that those adjacent to the resource the system. will have priority in fishing the resource, new entrants from Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and P.E.I. were not included in the Of course, Mr. Charest came and softened the position of the temporary sharing of northern shrimp. Nova Scotian interests Liberal Party of Quebec. As we know, Mr. Charest does not have received a share of the increase through existing licences held by any constitutional demands. He has no demands for Ottawa. Nova Scotian companies, which represent two and a half licences Besides, the Prime Minister told him so very clearly. out of seventeen. The existing licence holders received 90% of the increase off northern Labrador and 10% of the increase off eastern Newfoundland. D (1825)

Fishing communities in Newfoundland and Labrador, northern Saturday, the Prime Minister of Canada put it back in his face, Quebec and the lower north shore of Quebec benefited from the saying ‘‘What do you think Quebec needs? My allied in Quebec, increase. In addition, those who received temporary access in 1997 Mr. Charest, tells me he needs nothing.’’ That is a problem we face. received the same level of quota in 1998. The traditional offshore fleet also shared in the quota increases. But everyone in Quebec still wants this money to be returned to Quebeckers, to the Government of Quebec so that it can invest it in Following the May 15th announcement, DFO approved tempo- accordance with its priorities. rary sharing of the gulf shrimp and Scotian shelf shrimp resources with fishermen in Nova Scotia, P.E.I., New Brunswick and Quebec. Out of this $600 million, Quebec could invest $20 million in the The sharing in these fisheries was also consistent with the principle Lower St. Lawrence region that I represent. We could use the $20 October 26, 1998 COMMONS DEBATES 9433

Adjournment Debate million to better purpose in our schools, in our colleges, by inces to establish criteria and to avoid duplication with what the allowing them to offer professional options better suited to the new provinces are already delivering. economy, to offer agricultural programs on new production meth- ods, on all sorts of very important sectors. The foundation will be undertaking consultations over the next few months with the provinces and the educational community to The millennium scholarships program is probably the measure increase access to post-secondary education everywhere in Canada that shows most clearly the government’s centralising approach, for low and middle income Canadians in a manner that avoids but we still hope to see the government back down, and give the duplication and builds on existing provincial programs and pro- money back to the provinces, which are the real experts in cesses. This makes good sense for students, for the provinces and education. for Canada. Quebeckers should feel confident that the millennium scholar- Is it possible to make the government see reason, to make it ship foundation will act responsibly and will work with all the reverse its decision and give the money back to Quebec, thus provinces in a way that will avoid duplication with provincial allowing Quebec’s educational institutions and students to redis- systems. Jean Monty, the president of the foundation, is a well tribute the money in accordance with their needs and not to use the respected and responsible individual. We are confident he will money for scholarships based on merit that nobody wants in work well with all provincial governments, including the Govern- Quebec? ment of Quebec, to ensure students have better access to education provided by the provinces. [English] The foundation will make every effort to establish the millen- Mrs. Brenda Chamberlain (Parliamentary Secretary to Min- nium scholarships in a manner that respects the needs of each ister of Labour, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to respond to province, including Quebec. comments made last May by the member opposite on the millen- nium scholarships. I urge the hon. member to recognize that both orders of governments have a role to play to increase the equality of opportuntiy for Canada’s young people. Through partnerships we My colleague raised comments made at the time by the three can achieve results which are beneficial to all Canadians, each and largest employer organizations in Quebec on the scholarships and every one of us. on the constitutional jurisdiction of Quebec. The millennium scholarships are not about jurisdiction. Rather, The Government of Canada recognizes that education is a matter they represent Canada’s unique way of celebrating a new millen- of provincial jurisdiction. We are not interested in stepping into nium by investing in all Canadians and their future. provincial jurisdiction in terms of education. What we believe strongly about is helping Canadians have proper access to the good [Translation] education and the knowledge provided by the provinces. That is why we introduced the millennium scholarships. We have always The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): The motion to adjourn stated that the enabling legislation offers all the flexibility needed the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, this to meet much of what Quebec wants. House stands ajourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1). The millennium scholarships will be managed and delivered by an independent foundation that will work closely with the prov- (The House adjourned at 6.28 p.m.)

CONTENTS

Monday, October 26, 1998

PRIVATE MEMBERS’ BUSINESS Mr. Cannis...... 9388 Mrs. Wayne...... 9388 Fishers’ Bill of Rights Mr. Harvey...... 9388 Bill C–302. Second reading ...... 9363 Mr. Hubbard...... 9363 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Mr. Gilmour...... 9364 Mr. Earle...... 9365 Taste of the Danforth Festival Mr. Matthews...... 9366 Mr. Cannis...... 9389 Mr. Matthews...... 9367 British Columbia Mr. Sekora...... 9367 Mr. White (Langley—Abbotsford)...... 9389 Mr. Cummins...... 9369 Mr. Steckle...... 9370 Kids from the Valley Mr. Power...... 9372 Mr. Clouthier...... 9390 Regional Development GOVERNMENT ORDERS Mr. St–Julien...... 9390 Supply Government of Canada Allotted Day—Employment Insurance Mr. Strahl...... 9390 Mr. Dubé (Madawaska—Restigouche)...... 9372 Street Cents Motion...... 9372 Mr. Pagtakhan...... 9390 Mr. Crête...... 9374 Mr. Dubé (Madawaska—Restigouche)...... 9374 National Block Parent Week Mr. Saada...... 9391 Canada Customs and Revenue Agency Act Bill C–43—Notice of time allocation Gordon Molendyk Mr. Boudria...... 9375 Mr. Harris...... 9391 Supply UNICEF Allotted Day—Employment Insurance Mrs. Ur...... 9391 Motion ...... 9375 Mi’kmaq Mr. Matthews...... 9375 Mr. Earle...... 9391 Amendment ...... 9376 Community Futures Development Corporations Mr. Easter...... 9376 Mr. St. Denis...... 9391 Mr. Easter...... 9376 Mr. Matthews...... 9376 Epidermolysis bullosa Mr. Stoffer...... 9376 Ms. Bulte...... 9392 Mr. Matthews...... 9376 J. Alphonse Deveau Mr. Pettigrew...... 9377 Mr. Muise...... 9392 Mr. Crête...... 9378 Mr. Pettigrew...... 9378 Quebec–Japan Relations Mr. Crête...... 9378 Mrs. Debien...... 9392 Mr. Pettigrew...... 9379 Canadian Forces Mr. Dubé (Madawaska—Restigouche)...... 9379 Mr. Maloney...... 9392 Mr. Pettigrew...... 9379 Employment Insurance Mr. Solberg...... 9379 Mr. Solberg...... 9393 Mr. Muise...... 9381 Mr. Solberg...... 9381 Fonds de solidarité des travailleurs du Québec Mr. Shepherd...... 9381 Mr. Desrochers...... 9393 Mr. Solberg...... 9381 Mr. Crête...... 9381 ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Mr. Martin (Winnipeg Centre)...... 9383 Quebec Election Mr. Crête...... 9385 Mr. Manning...... 9393 Mr. Martin (Winnipeg Centre)...... 9385 Mr. Dion...... 9393 Mr. Keddy...... 9385 Mr. Manning...... 9393 Mr. Martin (Winnipeg Centre)...... 9385 Mr. Dion...... 9393 Mrs. Wayne...... 9386 Mr. Manning...... 9393 Mr. Shepherd...... 9387 Mr. Dion...... 9394 Mrs. Wayne...... 9387 Mr. Solberg...... 9387 APEC Inquiry Mrs. Wayne...... 9388 Miss Grey...... 9394 Mr. Scott (Fredericton)...... 9394 East Timor Miss Grey...... 9394 Mr. Robinson...... 9399 Mr. Scott (Fredericton)...... 9394 Mr. Axworthy (Winnipeg South Centre)...... 9399 The Constitution Taxation Mr. Duceppe...... 9394 Mr. Riis...... 9399 Mr. Dion...... 9394 Mr. Dhaliwal...... 9399 Mr. Duceppe...... 9394 The Constitution Mr. Dion...... 9395 Mr. Bachand (Richmond—Arthabaska)...... 9399 Mr. Brien...... 9395 Mr. Dion...... 9399 Mr. Dion...... 9395 Mr. Bachand (Richmond—Arthabaska)...... 9400 Mr. Brien...... 9395 Mr. Dion...... 9400 Mr. Dion...... 9395 Pensions APEC Inquiry Mr. McCormick...... 9400 Ms. McDonough...... 9395 Mr. Pettigrew...... 9400 Mr. Scott (Fredericton)...... 9395 Ms. McDonough...... 9395 The Constitution Mr. Scott (Fredericton)...... 9395 Mr. Jaffer...... 9400 Mr. Dion...... 9400 Employment Insurance Young Offenders Act Mrs. Wayne...... 9395 Mr. Bellehumeur...... 9400 Mr. Martin (LaSalle—Émard)...... 9395 Ms. McLellan...... 9400 Mrs. Wayne...... 9395 Mr. Martin (LaSalle—Émard)...... 9396 Justice Mr. Mancini...... 9401 APEC Inquiry Ms. McLellan...... 9401 Mr. Abbott...... 9396 Mr. Scott (Fredericton)...... 9396 Agriculture Mr. Abbott...... 9396 Mr. Muise...... 9401 Mr. Scott (Fredericton)...... 9396 Mr. Vanclief...... 9401 Federal Spending Power Immigration Mr. Loubier...... 9396 Ms. Leung...... 9401 Mr. Dion...... 9396 Mr. Telegdi...... 9401 Mr. Loubier...... 9396 Aboriginal Affairs Mr. Martin (LaSalle—Émard)...... 9396 Mr. Solberg...... 9401 Aboriginal Affairs Mrs. Stewart (Brant)...... 9401 Mr. Konrad...... 9397 The Constitution ...... Mrs. Stewart (Brant) 9397 Mr. Turp...... 9401 ...... Mr. Konrad 9397 Ms. Copps...... 9402 Mrs. Stewart (Brant)...... 9397 Health Health Care Ms. Wasylycia–Leis...... 9402 Mrs. Picard...... 9397 Mr. Rock...... 9402 Mr. Rock...... 9397 Mrs. Picard...... 9397 Highways ...... Mr. Rock...... 9397 Mr. Muise 9402 Mr. Dromisky...... 9402 Agriculture Bill C–44 Mr. Hoeppner...... 9397 Mrs. Venne...... 9402 Mr. Goodale...... 9397 Mr. Massé ...... 9402 Mr. Hoeppner...... 9398 Mr. Goodale...... 9398 Taxation Mr. White (Langley—Abbotsford)...... 9402 Millennium Scholarships Mr. Bigras...... 9398 Canadian Coast Guard Mr. Dion...... 9398 Mr. Stoffer...... 9402 Mr. Anderson...... 9403 Agriculture Mr. Calder...... 9398 ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS Mr. Vanclief...... 9398 Government Response to Petitions Gasoline Mr. Adams...... 9403 Mr. Kenney...... 9398 Mrs. Stewart (Northumberland)...... 9398 Interparliamentary Delegations Mr. Kenney...... 9399 The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)...... 9403 Mrs. Stewart (Northumberland)...... 9399 Mr. Maloney...... 9403 Criminal Code (Motion agreed to) ...... 9406 Bill C–448. Introduction and first reading ...... 9403 Mr. Crête...... 9406 Mr. Harris...... 9403 Mr. Harvey...... 9407 (Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time Mr. Stoffer...... 9407 and printed) ...... 9403 Mr. Harvey...... 9407 Petitions Mr. Easter...... 9407 Rights of Grandparents Mr. Chrétien (Frontenac—Mégantic)...... 9408 Mr. Easter...... 9409 Mr. Harb...... 9403 Marriage Mr. Stoffer...... 9409 Mr. Williams...... 9404 Mr. Easter...... 9409 Bill C–304 Mr. Shepherd...... 9409 Mr. de Savoye...... 9404 Mr. Thompson (New Brunswick Southwest)...... 9411 Food and Drug Act Mr. Shepherd...... 9411 Mr. Robinson...... 9404 Mr. Harris...... 9411 Human Rights Mr. Thompson (New Brunswick Southwest)...... 9412 Mr. Szabo...... 9404 Mr. Harris...... 9412 Public Safety Officers Mr. Easter...... 9412 Mr. Szabo...... 9404 Mr. Harris...... 9413 Marriage Mr. Chrétien (Frontenac—Mégantic)...... 9413 Mr. MacKay...... 9404 Mr. Harris...... 9413 Abolition of Senate Mr. Lowther...... 9413 Mr. Chrétien (Frontenac—Mégantic)...... 9404 Mr. Hubbard...... 9415 Marriage Mr. Lowther...... 9415 Mr. Pankiw...... 9405 Mr. Stoffer...... 9415 Criminal Code Mr. Lowther...... 9415 Mr. Pankiw...... 9405 Mr. Bertrand...... 9415 Multilateral Agreement on Investment Mrs. Gagnon...... 9417 Mr. Solomon...... 9405 Mr. Bertrand...... 9417 Rights of grandparents Mr. Chrétien (Frontenac—Mégantic)...... 9417 Mr. Calder...... 9405 Mr. Bertrand...... 9417 Gasoline Mr. Richardson...... 9417 Mrs. Ur...... 9405 Mr. Dubé (Madawaska—Restigouche)...... 9419 Multilateral Agreement on Investment Mr. Richardson...... 9419 Mr. Riis...... 9405 Mr. Dubé (Madawaska—Restigouche)...... 9419 Canada Pension Plan Mr. Richardson...... 9419 Mr. Riis...... 9405 Mr. Dubé (Madawaska—Restigouche)...... 9419 Cruelty to Animals Mr. Richardson...... 9419 Mr. Riis...... 9405 Mr. Dubé (Madawaska—Restigouche)...... 9419 Euthanasia Mr. Richardson...... 9419 Mr. PeriŇ ...... 9405 Mr. Solberg...... 9419 Multilateral Agreement on Investment Mr. Richardson...... 9419 Mr. PeriŇ ...... 9405 Mrs. Gagnon...... 9419 Marriage Ms. Vautour...... 9421 Mr. PeriŇ ...... 9405 Mrs. Gagnon...... 9421 Gasoline Mrs. Picard...... 9421 Mr. Steckle...... 9406 Mrs. Gagnon...... 9421 Multilateral Agreement on Investment Mr. Bigras...... 9421 Mr. Martin (Winnipeg Centre)...... 9406 Ms. Vautour...... 9423 Mr. Stoffer...... 9406 Mr. Bigras...... 9423 Questions on the Order Paper Mr. de Savoye...... 9423 Mr. Adams...... 9406 Mr. Bigras...... 9423 Mr. Robinson...... 9406 Mr. Clouthier...... 9423 Mr. Crête...... 9425 Mr. Crête...... 9425 GOVERNMENT ORDERS Mr. Clouthier...... 9425 Supply Ms. Vautour...... 9425 Allotted day—Employment Insurance Mr. Clouthier...... 9425 Motion ...... 9406 Mrs. Chamberlain...... 9426 Mr. Kilger...... 9406 Mr. Chrétien (Frontenac—Mégantic)...... 9427 Motion ...... 9406 Mrs. Chamberlain...... 9427 Mr. Chrétien (Frontenac—Mégantic)...... 9428 ADJOURNMENT PROCEEDINGS Mr. Pankiw...... 9428 Fisheries Mrs. Chamberlain...... 9428 Mr. MacKay...... 9431 Ms. Vautour...... 9428 Mr. Easter...... 9432 Mr. Crête...... 9429 Ms. Vautour...... 9430 Millennium Scholarships Mr. Stoffer...... 9430 Mr. Crête...... 9432 Divisions deemed demanded and deferred ...... 9431 Mrs. Chamberlain...... 9433 MāāAāāIāāL PāOāSāTāE Canada Post Corporation/Société canadienne des postes Postage paid Port payé Lettermail Poste-lettre 03159442 Ottawa

If undelivered, return COVER ONLY to: Canadian Government Publishing, 45 Sacré-Coeur Boulevard, Hull, Québec, Canada, K1A 0S9

En cas de non-livraison, retourner cette COUVERTURE SEULEMENT à: Les Éditions du gouvernement du Canada, 45 boulevard Sacré-Coeur, Hull, Québec, Canada, K1A 0S9

Published under the authority of the Speaker of the House of Commons

Publié en conformité de l'autorité du Président de la Chambre des communes

Also available on the Parliamentary Internet Parlementaire at the following address: Aussi disponible sur le réseau électronique «Parliamentary Internet Parlementaire» à l'adresse suivante : http://www.parl.gc.ca

The Speaker of the House hereby grants permission to reproduce this document, in whole or in part, for use in schools and for other purposes such as private study, research, criticism, review or newspaper summary. Any commercial or other use or reproduction of this publication requires the express prior written authorization of the Speaker of the House of Commons. Additional copies may be obtained from Canadian Government Publishing, Ottawa, Canada K1A 0S9

Le Président de la Chambre des communes accorde, par la présente, l'autorisation de reproduire la totalité ou une partie de ce document à des fins éducatives et à des fins d'étude privée, de recherche, de critique, de compte rendu ou en vue d'en préparer un résumé de journal. Toute reproduction de ce document à des fins commerciales ou autres nécessite l'obtention au préalable d'une autorisation écrite du Président. On peut obtenir des copies supplémentaires en écrivant à : Les Éditions du gouvernement du Canada, Ottawa, Canada K1A 0S9 On peut obtenir la version française de cette publication en écrivant à Travaux publics et Services gouvernementaux Canada - Édition, Ottawa, Canada K1A 0S9.